On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Evan Cheng <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Oct 29, 2012, at 1:21 PM, Eric Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Quentin Colombet <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Oct 24, 2012, at 9:25 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Quentin Colombet <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Following the adding of the new ForceSizeOpt attribute in LLVM (see >>>>> commit r1664220), I am making a patch for clang to set this attribute on >>>>> each function when the Oz optimization level is set. >>>> >>>> Can you fix the attribute based on the code review feedback first? I'd >>>> rather not start generating the IR when it's about to change. >>> >>> Hi Chandler, >>> >>> I am not sure to know which review you are talking about. >>> From my understanding, according to Eli, it was ok, and according to Evan, >>> it was ok too but may change in the future. >>> I was not making the future happening now, if it was that you meant :). >>> >> >> This is what he meant, what's the point of doing this as a short term >> fix when the full fix is both a) not much more work and b) there are >> objections to the existing patch? > > It's not a lot of work except for getting agreement. There is no urgency to > make the change to -Os[123] now, there are no driving forces behind it. I'd > recommend punting it. >
Do you have any particular like or dislike for any of the proposals in Chandler's mail? > As for the attribute name, I have no strong opinions. It's a obviously open > to interpretation. > Sure. How about we rename it something else as a short term start? It really does look confusing when it's just a different selector for the backend inlining (and a few other things as Quentin's followups are starting to use). -eric _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
