rSerge updated this revision to Diff 72554.
rSerge added a comment.
Implemented a workaround for XFAIL not differentiating between `x86` and
`x86_64` because it searches for a substring in the triple string, thus `x86`
matches both `x86-X-Y-Z` and `x86_64-X-Y-Z`.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D2479
rSerge added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Driver/Tools.cpp:4777-4780
@@ +4776,6 @@
+{
+ std::string Feature(XRayInstrumentOption);
+ Feature += " on ";
+ Feature += Triple.getArchName().data();
+ D.Diag(diag::err_drv_clang_unsupported) << Feature;
+
dberris added inline comments.
Comment at: lib/Driver/Tools.cpp:4777-4780
@@ +4776,6 @@
+{
+ std::string Feature(XRayInstrumentOption);
+ Feature += " on ";
+ Feature += Triple.getArchName().data();
+ D.Diag(diag::err_drv_clang_unsupported) << Feature;
+
rSerge updated this revision to Diff 72312.
rSerge added a comment.
Herald added a subscriber: rampitec.
Added a test.
Changed the error message to:
> clang++.exe: error: the clang compiler does not support '-fxray-instrument on
> armv6kz--linux-gnueabihf'
https://reviews.llvm.org/D24799
Fil
dberris added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24799#549634, @rSerge wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24799#549442, @dberris wrote:
>
> > What does the error actually look like? Can you add a test for it? It's
> > unclear to me how this would read... for example does it say "XRay for
rSerge added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24799#549442, @dberris wrote:
> What does the error actually look like? Can you add a test for it? It's
> unclear to me how this would read... for example does it say "XRay for arm is
> unsupported"?
In the attached picture you can see how
dberris added a comment.
What does the error actually look like? Can you add a test for it? It's unclear
to me how this would read... for example does it say "XRay for arm is
unsupported"?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D24799
___
cfe-commits mailing li
