[PATCH] D94461: [llvm-ifs] Add option to use InterfaceStub library

Tue Jan 12 01:57:10 PST 2021

phosek added a comment.

In D94461#2491947 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D94461#2491947>, @plotfi wrote:

> In D94461#2491946 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D94461#2491946>, @plotfi wrote:
>
>>> 1. I think for unification, the first thing would be unifying the text abi file format. Currently, the YAML format used by ifs is very similar to the one used in InterfaceStub(elfabi), however there are not compatible. One thing is that ifs embeds llvm triples in the text ifs file while elfabi does not do that. Elfabi get platform and endianness information from command line instead of getting them from the text stub file. We did that because there are use cases that we generate ELF stubs for multiple platforms using a single set of text abi files. Is there a specific reason why ifs text files require llvm triples? Is it feasible to make llvm-ifs to get the platform information from the command line options?
>>
>> The triple-ness was added because originally IFS was intended to be a tool that the clang driver invokes. The idea was that you build some project with IFS enabled and you automatically get the stubs for shipping or for CI purposes to track what new exposure was done in recent builds of said project. I think it would be ok to add a flag to override the triple if that isn't there already. @compnerd 
>>  thoughts?
>
> I meant to add, as part of llvm-ifs being invoked by clang the idea was that clang would just forward its triple and llvm-ifs would decide what to do with it because we wanted the ifs format to be kinda platform agnostic but we wanted llvm-ifs to potentially be able to generate stubs for multiple platforms in the future (like MS .libs and tbds etc too).

Would you need a full triple in that case? Other binary tools like linkers doesn't use a full triple either, they use just `e_machine` and `e_ident`. Would that be sufficient?

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D94461/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D94461