================
@@ -173,17 +172,40 @@ void AMDGCN::Linker::constructLinkAndEmitSpirvCommand(
const char *LinkedBCFilePath = HIP::getTempFile(C, LinkedBCFilePrefix, "bc");
InputInfo LinkedBCFile(&JA, LinkedBCFilePath, Output.getBaseInput());
+ bool UseSPIRVBackend =
+ Args.hasFlag(options::OPT_use_spirv_backend,
+ options::OPT_no_use_spirv_backend, /*Default=*/false);
+
constructLlvmLinkCommand(C, JA, Inputs, LinkedBCFile, Args);
- // Emit SPIR-V binary.
- llvm::opt::ArgStringList TrArgs{
- "--spirv-max-version=1.6",
- "--spirv-ext=+all",
- "--spirv-allow-unknown-intrinsics",
- "--spirv-lower-const-expr",
- "--spirv-preserve-auxdata",
- "--spirv-debug-info-version=nonsemantic-shader-200"};
- SPIRV::constructTranslateCommand(C, *this, JA, Output, LinkedBCFile, TrArgs);
+ if (UseSPIRVBackend) {
----------------
mgcarrasco wrote:
@jhuber6 This PR is designed for the new driver and this handling here is
required for the _new_ driver when `clang-linker-wrapper` calls `clang`. We
link the bitcode first because we can't have a dependency with `spirv-link`,
this is required for `-fgpu-rdc`.
I'm writing this comment to make a question for the _old_ driver. The old
driver always builds SPIR-V in the linking step (this function). This new code
for the new driver works out-of-the-box for the old driver. This enables
`-use-spirv-backend` also for the old driver.
Would it be OK to let the _old driver_ use this new code to handle
`-use-spirv-backend` as we need? I mean considering that this change is already
required for the _new driver_.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/167543
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
