We don't have a style guide for diagnostic messages, but convention strongly
favours the forms:
'attribute is not supported', 'unsupported attribute'
We generally avoid:
'attribute is unsupported', 'non-supported attribute'
llvm-svn: 212972
Use -Winvalid-command-line-argument here to align with existing gcc opt
diagnostics. Meanwhile -Wunused-command-line-argument is for flags that we
support but were, say, fed into the wrong invocation.
Also tweak wording to make sense with -Werror.
llvm-svn: 212964
Summary:
Added some tests to see if the new warning would be silenced with a flag.
Patch by Arthur Marble <arthur@info9.net> in the context of Debian Google Summer of code 2014.
Reviewers: sylvestre.ledru
Reviewed By: sylvestre.ledru
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4475
llvm-svn: 212833
Returns a warning when using an unknown optimization flag.
This patch includes -finline-limit as one of those ignored flags.
More options will be moved in this group
Patch by Arthur Marble <arthur@info9.net> in the context of
Debian Google Summer of code 2014.
Reviewers: rnk, Sylvestre
llvm-svn: 212805
Currently, we fail with an error.
Reviewers: rafael
Reviewed By: rafael
Subscribers: rnk, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4347
llvm-svn: 212110
hack of passing -fconst-strings to -cc1"
Passing or not a language option based on diagnostic settings is a bad idea, it breaks
using a PCH that was compiled with different diagnostic settings.
Also add a test case to make sure we don't regress.
llvm-svn: 200964
Summary:
GCC uses -fauto-profile to enable sample-based PGO. This patch
adds it to Clang as an alias for -fprofile-sample-use.
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2353
llvm-svn: 196589
After r195009, the test would write a .o file to the test dir. Send that to
/dev/null instead. Also fix the typo in test/Frontend/invalid-o-level.c.
llvm-svn: 195047
Summary:
Currently with clang:
$ clang -O20 foo.c
error: invalid value '20' in '-O20'
With the patch:
$ clang -O20 foo.c
warning: optimization level '-O20' is unsupported; using '-O3' instead.
1 warning generated.
This matches the gcc behavior (with a warning added)
Pass all tests:
Testing: 0 .. 10.. 20.. 30.. 40.. 50.. 60.. 70.. 80.. 90..
Testing Time: 94.14s
Expected Passes : 6721
Expected Failures : 20
Unsupported Tests : 17
(which was not the case of http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2125)
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2212
llvm-svn: 195009
This adds -freroll-loops (and -fno-reroll-loops in the usual way) to enable
loop rerolling as part of the optimization pass manager. This transformation
can enable vectorization, reduce code size (or both).
Briefly, loop rerolling can transform a loop like this:
for (int i = 0; i < 3200; i += 5) {
a[i] += alpha * b[i];
a[i + 1] += alpha * b[i + 1];
a[i + 2] += alpha * b[i + 2];
a[i + 3] += alpha * b[i + 3];
a[i + 4] += alpha * b[i + 4];
}
into this:
for (int i = 0; i < 3200; ++i) {
a[i] += alpha * b[i];
}
Loop rerolling is currently disabled by default at all optimization levels.
llvm-svn: 194967
Trying to fix test failures since earlier today.
One of the tests added in this commit is outputting test/Driver/clang_f_opts.s
which the builders that build in-tree (eg. clang-native-arm-cortex-a9) are
trying to run as a test case, causing failures.
clang_f_opts.c:
If -### doesn't emit the warning then this test probably shouldn't be in
here in the first place. Frontend maybe?
invalid-o-level.c:
Running %clang_cc1 in the Driver tests doesn't make sense because -cc1
bypasses the driver. (I'm not reverting the commit that introduced this but
please fix instead of keeping it this way.)
Reverting to fix the build failures and also so that the tests can be thought
out more thoroughly.
This reverts commit r194817.
llvm-svn: 194845
This adds a new option -fprofile-sample-use=filename to Clang. It
tells the driver to schedule the SampleProfileLoader pass and passes
on the name of the profile file to use.
llvm-svn: 194567
Summary:
Currently with clang:
$ clang -O20 foo.c
error: invalid value '20' in '-O20'
With the patch:
$ clang -O20 foo.c
warning: invalid value '20' in '-O20'. Fall back on value '3'
Reviewers: rengolin, hfinkel
Reviewed By: rengolin
CC: cfe-commits, hfinkel, rengolin
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2125
llvm-svn: 194403
hack of passing -fconst-strings to -cc1, but at least the driver uses
the regular warning checking code path.
Since we don't support a warning that is DefaultIgnore in one language
but not in another, this patch creates a dummy C only warning in the same
group as the existing one to get the desired effect.
llvm-svn: 194097
This GCC flag is useful when you want to control whether implicit
template instantiation occurs at the commandline level. Clang doesn't
currently support such controls, but technically *always* implicitly
instantiating (what Clang does, and what every other compiler still in
use does by default) is valid behavior even under
-fno-implicit-templates, it just may be slow and very wasteful. If
people really want this, we can try to implement it, but I don't have an
actual use.
This should help fix the build of libstdc++ with Clang, its build system
uses this flag.
llvm-svn: 193319
flag. We should probably wire at least some variants of this up to our
actual diagnostics engine, but I'm leaving that for someone else. This
fixes the builds of packages which hard code something here, at least
including libstdc++ itself.
llvm-svn: 193318
It is possible that we should say some of these are unsupported, but this is
not any worse than the old behavior of ignoring all unknown -f options.
llvm-svn: 191429
* In C, as before, if the "warning flag" is enabled, warnings are produced by
forcing string literals to have const-qualified types (the produced warnings
are *not* -Wwrite-strings warnings). However, more recent GCCs (at least 4.4
onwards) now take -w into account here, so we now do the same.
* In C++, this flag is entirely sane: it behaves just like any other warning
flag. Stop triggering -fconst-strings here. This is a bit cleaner, but there's
no real functionality change except in the case where -Xclang -fno-const-strings
is also specified.
llvm-svn: 190006
As Chandler pointed out, we should not be using -backend-option because this
will cause crashes for users of the tooling interface, etc. A better way to fix
this will be to provide the unrolling pass-manager flag to the loop vectorizer
directly.
Original commit message:
Disable loop vectorizer unrolling when no unrolling requested
In addition to the regular loop unrolling transformation, the loop vectorizer
can also unroll loops. If no unrolling has specifically been requested (by
-fno-unroll-loops), and the loop vectorizer will be used, then add the backend
option to (also) prevent the loop vectorizer from unrolling loops.
I confirmed with Nadav (off list) that disabling vectorizer loop unrolling when
-fno-unroll-loops is provided is the desired behavior.
llvm-svn: 189441
In addition to the regular loop unrolling transformation, the loop vectorizer
can also unroll loops. If no unrolling has specifically been requested (by
-fno-unroll-loops), and the loop vectorizer will be used, then add the backend
option to (also) prevent the loop vectorizer from unrolling loops.
I confirmed with Nadav (off list) that disabling vectorizer loop unrolling when
-fno-unroll-loops is provided is the desired behavior.
llvm-svn: 189440
We error on -O5 and higher. While it is tempting to do the same for -O4, I
agree with Jordan Rose: we should warn for a release at least first.
llvm-svn: 189369
We used to decide whether to really vectorize depending on the optimization
level in PassManagerBuilder.
This patch moves this decision to the clang driver. We look at the optimization
level and whether the f(no-)vectorize is set and decide whether to vectorize.
This allows us to simplify the logic in PassManagerBuilder to just a check for
whether the vectorizer should run or not.
We now do the right thing for:
$ clang -O1 -fvectorize
$ clang -fno-vectorize -O3
llvm-svn: 188280
'-fno-unroll-loops'. The option to the backend is even called
'DisableUnrollLoops'. This is precisely the form that Clang *didn't*
support. We didn't recognize the flag, we didn't pass it to the CC1
layer, and even if we did we wouldn't use it. Clang only inspected the
positive form of the flag, and only did so to enable loop unrolling when
the optimization level wasn't high enough. This only occurs for an
optimization level that even has a chance of running the loop unroller
when optimizing for size.
This commit wires up the 'no' variant, and switches the code to actually
follow the standard flag pattern of using the last flag and allowing
a flag in either direction to override the default.
I think this is still wrong. I don't know why we disable the loop
unroller entirely *from Clang* when optimizing for size, as the loop
unrolling pass *already has special logic* for the case where the
function is attributed as optimized for size! We should really be
trusting that. Maybe in a follow-up patch, I don't really want to change
behavior here.
llvm-svn: 187969
This was GCC's option to turn on UCN support, which we always have on now
in C99 and C++ modes.
Additionally, mark the -fno-extended-identifiers option as unsupported,
since we don't support disabling UCNs in C99 and C++ modes.
PR11538
llvm-svn: 174530
Alp Toker