@llvm/pr-subscribers-openmp

Author: Martin Storsjö (mstorsjo)

diff --git a/openmp/cmake/HandleOpenMPOptions.cmake b/openmp/cmake/HandleOpenMPOptions.cmake
index 71346201129b68..9387d9b3b0ff75 100644
--- a/openmp/cmake/HandleOpenMPOptions.cmake
+++ b/openmp/cmake/HandleOpenMPOptions.cmake
@@ -46,7 +46,11 @@ append_if(OPENMP_HAVE_WEXTRA_FLAG "-Wno-extra" CMAKE_C_FLAGS CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS)
 append_if(OPENMP_HAVE_WPEDANTIC_FLAG "-Wno-pedantic" CMAKE_C_FLAGS CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS)
 append_if(OPENMP_HAVE_WMAYBE_UNINITIALIZED_FLAG "-Wno-maybe-uninitialized" CMAKE_C_FLAGS CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS)
 
-append_if(OPENMP_HAVE_NO_SEMANTIC_INTERPOSITION "-fno-semantic-interposition" CMAKE_C_FLAGS CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS)
+if (NOT (WIN32 OR CYGWIN))
+  # This flag is not relevant on Windows; the flag is accepted, but produces warnings
+  # about argument unused during compilation.
+  append_if(OPENMP_HAVE_NO_SEMANTIC_INTERPOSITION "-fno-semantic-interposition" CMAKE_C_FLAGS CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS)
+endif()
 append_if(OPENMP_HAVE_FUNCTION_SECTIONS "-ffunction-section" CMAKE_C_FLAGS CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS)
 append_if(OPENMP_HAVE_DATA_SECTIONS "-fdata-sections" CMAKE_C_FLAGS CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS)
 

You could likely remove this entire thing until we figure out a better way to handle this. It seems our options handling is kind of a mess right now and doesn't do a good job separating runtime builds from the LLVM project itself. But this is fine.

Thanks! Yes, openmp doesn't work quite smoothly in all these build settings. Contrary to other runtimes such as libcxx, there's actually 4 different ways one can build openmp; building the main llvm directory, including openmp in LLVM_ENABLE_PROJECTS (which afaik is probably the most default and tested way), including openmp in LLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES. Then one can also build it standalone by pointing cmake at llvm-project/runtimes and including openmp in LLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES. And finally, one can build it by pointing cmake directly at llvm-project/openmp (which is mostly supported and tested, but some things break occasionally).

In the case of libcxx, it only supports the two ways where it is specified via LLVM_ENABLE_RUNTIMES (either via llvm-project/llvm or by directly pointing at llvm-project/runtimes).

Anyway, would you be fine with backporting this to 18.x, to reduce the amount of build time warnings there?