================ @@ -198,13 +199,20 @@ static int PrintSupportedExtensions(std::string TargetStr) { std::unique_ptr<llvm::TargetMachine> TheTargetMachine( TheTarget->createTargetMachine(TargetStr, "", "", Options, std::nullopt)); const llvm::Triple &MachineTriple = TheTargetMachine->getTargetTriple(); + const llvm::MCSubtargetInfo *MCInfo = TheTargetMachine->getMCSubtargetInfo(); ---------------- cbalint13 wrote:
On my side on this topic I already checked this situation, yes looks protected well. @DavidSpickett As sidenote here, on this topic opened by you: * In case of ```createTargetMachine```, notice the -mcpu="" (second argument), it will force to **return all target information**. If you specify i.e. "sandybridge" than you can only access list of features and descriptions only related to "sandybridge" subarchtecture / subset . * I really hope LLVM will keep this (-mcpu="" => ALL) , and not cut it out (some developer will think is a "safer" API), otherwise it will be impossible to query LLVM features of **a whole target**. LLVM looks (to humble me) very dynamic with frequent API changes, my point here is a "utilitarian view" as external user I would like to take benefits and features through API. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66715 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits