[llvm] r275348 - Add EnableIPRA to TargetOptions, and move the cl::opt -enable-ipra to TargetMachine.cpp

[Eric Christopher via llvm-commits]

On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 11:34 AM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:

> On Jul 14, 2016, at 10:34 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 2:01 PM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 14, 2016, at 1:34 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:30 PM Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Jul 14, 2016, at 1:26 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 4:47 PM Mehdi Amini via llvm-commits <
> llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Author: mehdi_amini
> Date: Wed Jul 13 18:39:46 2016
> New Revision: 275348
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=275348&view=rev
> Log:
> Add EnableIPRA to TargetOptions, and move the cl::opt -enable-ipra to
> TargetMachine.cpp
>
> Avoid exposing a cl::opt in a public header and instead promote this
> option in the API.
> Alternatively, we could land the cl::opt in CommandFlags.h so that
> it is available to every tool, but we would still have to find an
> option for clang.
>
>
> Are you planning to have it as a -f option to clang or just something via
> -mllvm?
>
>
>
> Not sure yet, what do you suggest?
>
>
> I'd probably leave it as a -mllvm option at the moment which means you
> don't need to put it into TargetOptions. Since you probably only would need
> it for llc anyhow?
>
>
> The question is “how to share access to this option as it starts to affect
> various part of the codegen”.
> I was not really happy with the previous state which was adding a global
> cl::opt into TargetPassConfig.h (and pull CommandLine.h into this public
> header as well), and adding it to “TargetOptions” seemed cleaner.
>
>
> Seems cleaner than that for sure.
>
>
> I’m fine with reverting this if you think it is fine to expose this
> cl::opt as a global in a public header?
>
>
> What are you envisioning ultimately? Staged rollout per target? Perhaps
> something similar to the MI Scheduler then?
>
>
> Yes an opt-in staged rollout per target seems likely. I’m not familiar
> with the MI Scheduler, is it just an option on TargetSubtargetInfo?
> How do we enable/disable it on the command line during development?
>

Sorry for the necromancy here, but I noticed it in my email:

Basically you can use the subtarget specific support similar to
enableMachineScheduler, enableJoinGlobalCopies, there are a bunch of
similar functions in include/llvm/Target/TargetSubtargetInfo.h that you can
look at for inspiration here.

Thanks!

-eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20161006/7881431b/attachment.html>