[PATCH] D85165: [X86][MC][Target] Initial backend support a tune CPU to support -mtune

[Eli Friedman via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

efriedma added a comment.

Could you add some test coverage for different scheduling models?

Do the x86 scheduling models do something sane with "impossible" instructions, like if you use AVX512 instructions with Atom tuning?

> In order to minimize code changes to non-X86 targets and out of tree targets in this initial patch. I've added a bit to the TableGen Target class to tell tablegen whether the targets supports a tune CPU.

How much work is it to "support" tune-cpu for a target without actually adding any tuning features?  If it's just a few function signatures in the subtarget, I'd prefer to just add it to all targets at once, rather than add the HasTuneCPU flag.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D85165/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D85165