[BOLT][NFC] Clean up the outdated option --write-dwp in doc

[Jinjie-Huang]

Since the "--write-dwp" option has been removed in PR, this patch also cleans up the corresponding document and test to avoid misleading issues.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-bolt

Author: Jinjie Huang (Jinjie-Huang)

Changes

Since the "--write-dwp" option have been removed in this pr, this patch also cleans up the corresponding documentation.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/166150.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) bolt/docs/CommandLineArgumentReference.md (-5)

diff --git a/bolt/docs/CommandLineArgumentReference.md b/bolt/docs/CommandLineArgumentReference.md
index d65cf39e16b29..636db823a2da2 100644
--- a/bolt/docs/CommandLineArgumentReference.md
+++ b/bolt/docs/CommandLineArgumentReference.md
@@ -381,11 +381,6 @@
 
   Set verbosity level for diagnostic output
 
-- `--write-dwp`
-
-  Output a single dwarf package file (dwp) instead of multiple non-relocatable
-  dwarf object files (dwo).
-
 ### BOLT optimization options:
 
 - `--align-blocks`

[paschalis-mpeis]

Looks good. Maybe worth removing the usage of the unsupported test in bolt/test/X86/dwarf4-ftypes-dwp-input-dwp-output.test too?

[Jinjie-Huang]

Thanks! The outdated test is removed too.

[paschalis-mpeis]

Thanks Jinjie. I was referring only to the flag on line 11, not to the whole (unsupported) test.
I'll defer to others if they're fine with removing it (cc: @ayermolo, @grigorypas).

[Jinjie-Huang]

Got it, It looks like this test aims to compare the pre-BOLT and post-BOLT DWP files for consistency. A better way might be to use llvm-dwp manually and remove the outdated usage. Thanks to recent patch from @Sockke, this test can be re-enabled now.

[ayermolo]

Thanks for the cleanup!