hfinkel added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/clang/Driver/Action.h:504
@@ +503,3 @@
+ /// unbundling action.
+ struct DependingActionInfoTy final {
+ /// \brief The tool chain of the depending action.
----------------
Don't need 'Ty' in the name of this struct.
================
Comment at: include/clang/Driver/Types.h:81
@@ +80,3 @@
+ /// isSrcFile - Is this a source file, i.e. something that still has to be
+ /// preprocessed. The logic behind this is the same that decides the first
+ /// compilation phase is a preprocessor one.
----------------
decided the first -> decides if the first
================
Comment at: include/clang/Driver/Types.h:82
@@ +81,3 @@
+ /// preprocessed. The logic behind this is the same that decides the first
+ /// compilation phase is a preprocessor one.
+ bool isSrcFile(ID Id);
----------------
preprocessor one -> preprocessing one
================
Comment at: lib/Driver/Driver.cpp:2091
@@ +2090,3 @@
+ InputArg->getOption().getKind() == llvm::opt::Option::InputClass &&
+ !types::isSrcFile(HostAction->getType())) {
+ auto UnbundlingHostAction =
----------------
This checks that the file needs to be preprocessed. What does preprocessing
have to do with this? I don't imagine that providing a preprocessed source file
as input should invoke the unbundler .
================
Comment at: test/Driver/openmp-offload.c:274
@@ +273,3 @@
+/// Check separate compilation with offloading - unbundling actions
+// RUN: touch %t.i
+// RUN: %clang -### -ccc-print-phases -fopenmp -o %t.out -lsomelib -target
powerpc64le-linux
-fopenmp-targets=powerpc64le-ibm-linux-gnu,x86_64-pc-linux-gnu %t.i 2>&1 \
----------------
Oh, are you using .i to indicate a bundle instead of a preprocessed file? Don't
do that. Please use a different suffix -- the bundler has its own file format.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21853
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
