guix-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug#69581] [PATCH 10/11] gnu: clang-properties: Update x86_64 micro-arc


From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: [bug#69581] [PATCH 10/11] gnu: clang-properties: Update x86_64 micro-architectures.
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2024 22:42:09 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)

Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:

> On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 07:12:25PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:
>> 
>> > * gnu/packages/llvm.scm (clang-properties): Add entries on x86_64 for
>> > versions 17, 16, 15, 13, 9 and remove entry for version 10.
>> >
>> > Change-Id: I93149c30f011c6de8ff0cc2c2b6f0186540359cd
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> > -      ;; This list was obtained by running:
>> > -      ;;
>> > -      ;;   guix shell clang -- llc -march=x86-64 -mattr=help
>> > -      ;;
>> > -      ;; filtered from uninteresting entries such as "i686" and "pentium".
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> > +      ("x86_64"
>> > +       ;; This list was obtained from 
>> > clang/test/Misc/target-invalid-cpu-note.c
>> 
>> Does the ‘llc’ method no longer work?  It looked easier.
>> 
>> Apart from that, LGTM.
>
> I've attached the file from llvmorg-15.0.7.  I found the file easier
> since I didn't have to run the command from the shell and it listed all
> the architectures I wouldn't have even thought of looking at.  And I
> didn't have to do any filtering myself. And it's sorted by "power" and
> by vendor, not alphabetically.

I see.  It looks convenient but that’s a unit test: it’s not the “ground
truth” and it doesn’t have to match exactly what’s supported.  The ‘llc’
command is likely more faithful so I would keep it at least in the
comment.

Ludo’.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]