Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Unit Tests
Time | Test | |
---|---|---|
130 ms | x64 windows > LLVM.tools/dsymutil/X86::label2.test |
Event Timeline
llvm/lib/Target/ARM/MCTargetDesc/ARMWinCOFFObjectWriter.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
32 | ARM64 is a different target, but the COFF writer can be shared across the two right? What makes it special? A comment to that effect would be useful. I think that we might want to try to push this upwards to avoid the parameter all together if the two paths cannot be merged. |
llvm/lib/Target/ARM/MCTargetDesc/ARMWinCOFFObjectWriter.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
32 | You mean this class? Almost everything in each of them is different between the two, so I don't really see what benefits there would be to stuffing both into one class with conditionals around everything. |
llvm/lib/Target/ARM/MCTargetDesc/ARMWinCOFFObjectWriter.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
30 | I think you can go further and remove the parameter here and in the factory function createARMWinCOFFObjectWriter. We only ever pass false to it. This just appears to be copy-pasta from the MachO version. The ARMELFObjectWriter doesn't have this constructor parameter. | |
32 | Even if there is overlap between aarch64 and arm, the shared code would have to live in MC, which means it would have to live in MCWinCOFFObjectWriter anyway. I think we can do this simplification. |
I think you can go further and remove the parameter here and in the factory function createARMWinCOFFObjectWriter. We only ever pass false to it. This just appears to be copy-pasta from the MachO version. The ARMELFObjectWriter doesn't have this constructor parameter.