[Mesa-stable] [PATCH v2 2/2] meson: swr: do a second llvm search with extra modules for llvm >= 7

[Juan A. Suarez Romero]

On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 13:33 -0700, Dylan Baker wrote:
> Quoting Chuck Atkins (2018-09-24 13:24:29)
> > Hi Dylan,
> > 
> > 
> >     I think you could simplify this:
> > 
> >     > +  if dep_llvm.found() and with_gallium_swr and dep_llvm.version
> >     ().version_compare('>= 7')
> >     > +    _llvm_2pass = true
> >     > +    llvm_modules += ['ipo', 'objcarcopts']
> >     > +  endif
> >     > +  if _llvm_2pass
> >     > +    dep_llvm = dependency(
> >     > +      'llvm',
> >     > +      version : _llvm_version,
> >     > +      modules : llvm_modules,
> >     > +      optional_modules : llvm_optional_modules,
> >     > +      required : _llvm_req,
> >     > +    )
> >     > +  endif
> > 
> > 
> >     if dep_llvm.found() and with_gallium_swr and dep_llvm.version
> >     ().version_compare('>= 7')
> >       llvm_modules += ['ipo', 'objcarcopts']
> >       dep_llvm = dependency(
> >         'llvm',
> >         version : _llvm_version,
> >         modules : llvm_modules,
> >         optional_modules : llvm_optional_modules,
> >         required : _llvm_req,
> >       )
> >     endif
> >     with_llvm = dep_llvm.found()
> > 
> > 
> > I could, and in fact, that exactly what I did initially.  But then I wanted to
> > explicitly seperate the second pass from the decision to do so making it easy
> > to allow other drivers to do something similar if needed in the same spot.
> > 
> > - Chuck
> 
> Okay, that's something I hadn't considered. It seems fine as is then.
> 

Dylan, is this "seems fine as it is" an implicit R+1? :)

	J.A.

> Dylan
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-stable mailing list
> mesa-stable at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-stable