DiggerLin marked 2 inline comments as done.
DiggerLin added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/BackendUtil.cpp:520
   Options.DataSections = CodeGenOpts.DataSections;
-  Options.IgnoreXCOFFVisibility = CodeGenOpts.IgnoreXCOFFVisibility;
   Options.UniqueSectionNames = CodeGenOpts.UniqueSectionNames;
----------------
jasonliu wrote:
> DiggerLin wrote:
> > jasonliu wrote:
> > > DiggerLin wrote:
> > > > jasonliu wrote:
> > > > > Instead of just removing this line, should this get replaced with the 
> > > > > new LangOpts option?
> > > > I do not think we need a CodeGenOp of ignore-xcoff-visibility in clang, 
> > > > we only need the LangOpt of the ignore-xcoff-visilbity to control 
> > > > whether we will  generate the visibility in the IR,  when the LangOpt 
> > > > of ignore-xcoff-visibility do not generate the visibility attribute of 
> > > > GV in the IR. it do not need CodeGenOp of ignore-xcoff-visibility any 
> > > > more for the clang .
> > > > 
> > > > we have still CodeGen ignore-xcoff-visibility op in  llc.
> > > We removed the visibility from IR level with this patch. But there is 
> > > also visibility settings coming from CodeGen part of clang, which needs 
> > > to get ignore when we are doing the code gen in llc. So I think you still 
> > > need to set the options correct for llc.
> > yes we have the set the options correct for llc in the code.
> > 
> > in the source file llvm/lib/CodeGen/CommandFlags.cpp, we have (in the patch 
> > https://reviews.llvm.org/D87451 add new option -mignore-xcoff-visibility) , 
> > the function
> > TargetOptions codegen::InitTargetOptionsFromCodeGenFlags() {
> > ....
> > Options.IgnoreXCOFFVisibility = getIgnoreXCOFFVisibility(); 
> > ...}
> > 
> What I'm saying is... 
> I think we need a line like this:
> `Options.IgnoreXCOFFVisibility = LangOpts.IgnoreXCOFFVisibility;`
> so that when you invoke clang, backend would get the correct setting as well. 
I do not think so, from the clang FE, we do not generated the visibility in the 
IR. so there is no need these line.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D89986/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D89986

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to