[PATCH] D96035: [dsymutil][DWARFlinker] implement separate multi-thread processing for compile units.

[Alexey Lapshin via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

avl added a comment.

In D96035#3505700 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96035#3505700>, @JDevlieghere wrote:

> In D96035#3504468 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96035#3504468>, @clayborg wrote:
>
>> Can we name the option something other than "--use-dlnext"? This option name won't mean much to users. Not sure what a good option name would be though but something that doesn't talk about internal classes that will be used would be better IMHO.
>
> Agreed. How about a flag to specify the dwarf linker: `--dwarf-linker={dsymutil,dwarfutil}`. The respective tools would have the respective linkers as their default and we could add more options later (e.g. dwarfutil with separete type units).
>
> With the flag renames this LGTM.

probably, we would like to use both dwarflinkers with dsymutil and dwarfutil. Thus, we do not want to name tools in the option. How about these variants:

  --dwarf-linker={classic,mt}  (mt is multy-thread)
  
  --dwarf-linker={classic,with-joined-types}
  
  --dwarf-linker={classic,experimental}

?

Also, to check my understanding, We are not going to integrate this patch as a single huge change. Instead, I will separate it to the series of reviews and we are going to integrated them one by one, correct?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D96035/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D96035