Nathan, Unless I have misunderstood both Chris and the Clang bug report, the problematic functions are in glibc. So, addition of the gnu_inline attribute would probably require either modifying system headers or interposing ahead of them.
-Paul On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Nathan Hjelm <hje...@me.com> wrote: > The best way to put this is his compiler defaults to --std=gnu89. That > gives him about 90% of what we require from C99 but has weirdness like > __restrict. The real solution is the list of functions that are called out > on link and spot fixing with the gnu_inline attribute if -fgnu89-inline > does not work. > > -Nathan > > On Aug 30, 2016, at 09:23 AM, "r...@open-mpi.org" <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > > Chris > > At the risk of being annoying, it would really help me if you could answer > my question: is Gilles correct in his feeling that we are looking at a > scenario where you can support 90% of C99 (e.g., C99-style comments, named > structure fields), and only the things modified in this PR are required? > > I’m asking because these changes are minor and okay, but going back thru > the code to revise all the comments and other C99isms would be a rather > large task. > > > On Aug 30, 2016, at 7:06 AM, C Bergström <cbergst...@pathscale.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) > > <jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote: > > On Aug 29, 2016, at 11:42 PM, C Bergström <cbergst...@pathscale.com> > wrote: > > > Paul - Is this your typical post? I can't tell if you're trying to be > > rude or it's accidental. > > > I believe that multiple people on this thread are reacting to the > passive-aggressive tones and negative connotations in charged replies. > > > Total bullshit - If any of my replies were "charged", passive > > aggressive or otherwise that was not my intention. Anyone who I > > thought has replied rudely, I have called out directly and I don't > > mince words. > > > I'm not interested to spend 50 replies on 3 small patches. If you guys > > don't care about platform X, Foo compiler or older standards I respect > > that. My 1st email started with what I consider a humble tone. My > > patches are public and I've given all the details I have time for. > > > Last try > > > > I'd like to see: > > > 1. The specific link error that we're talking about. > > > As posted before - the error is *exactly* the same as in the public > > clang bug report. > > > (Thanks to Nathan) > > https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search? > q=cache:p2WZm7Vlt2gJ:https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi% > 3Fid%3D5960+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us > > > > 2. All the information listed on https://www.open-mpi.org/community/help/ > for compile/build problems. > > > I'm not going to shift threw this wall of text to try to figure out > > what you feel is missing. (Now my tone is "curt" if I have to be > > clear) > > > > 3. More complete patches for fixing the issues. Specifically, the 3 > provided patches fix certain issues in some parts of the code base, but the > same issues occur in other places in the code base. As such, the provided > patches are not complete. > > > The patches against 1.x are complete. If you want to test and fix 2.x > > branch or git master feel free to pull my patches when I push them to > > our github. > > > You can verify the patches with clang and SLES10. In the near future > > it's likely I'll even post prebuilt binaries of clang which could be > > used for easier validation. There's also of course the nightly EKOPath > > builds that are available.. etc etc > > ------------ > > In parting - I will test LDFLAGS|CFLAGS=“-fgnu89-inline” and if it > > does indeed fix the issue without side effects I'll let you guys know. > > _______________________________________________ > > devel mailing list > > devel@lists.open-mpi.org > > https://rfd.newmexicoconsortium.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@lists.open-mpi.org > https://rfd.newmexicoconsortium.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@lists.open-mpi.org > https://rfd.newmexicoconsortium.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > -- Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@lists.open-mpi.org https://rfd.newmexicoconsortium.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
