[PATCH] D51011: [Preprocessor] raise gcc compatibility macros.

2018-08-23 Thread Nick Desaulniers via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nickdesaulniers added a comment.

Kernel patch: 
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=815f0ddb346c196018d4d8f8f55c12b83da1de3f

Thanks Eli and Richard, I appreciate it.


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D51011



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D51011: [Preprocessor] raise gcc compatibility macros.

2018-08-21 Thread Nick Desaulniers via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nickdesaulniers added a comment.

Thanks Eli.  I wholeheartedly prefer feature detection to explicit version 
checks.  One thing that makes this hard is the lack of __has_attribute in gcc: 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66970.


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D51011



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D51011: [Preprocessor] raise gcc compatibility macros.

2018-08-21 Thread Eli Friedman via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
efriedma added a comment.

I'd suggest something like this, if you really need to detect the compiler:

  #if defined(__clang__)
  // clang
  #elif defined(__INTEL_COMPILER)
  // icc
  #elif defined(__GNUC__)
  // gcc
  #else
  #error "Unknown compiler"
  #endif



> Regarding the glibc headers, do you know why glibc doesn't just add code for 
> __clang__ rather than Clang (and ICC) claim to be a gcc compatible to a point 
> compiler?

clang pretends to be gcc 4.2 because that was the simplest way to make a lot of 
existing code work, at the time clang was written. clang supports almost all 
the language extensions supported by that version of gcc, so code was more 
likely to work if clang pretended to be gcc, rather than some unknown compiler. 
 And now, it would break a bunch of code if it changed, so it basically can't 
be changed.  This is similar to the history of web browser user agent strings.

For new code, we encourage users to use the feature checking macros 
(https://clang.llvm.org/docs/LanguageExtensions.html#feature-checking-macros ), 
rather than checking for specific compiler versions, where possible.


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D51011



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D51011: [Preprocessor] raise gcc compatibility macros.

2018-08-21 Thread Nick Desaulniers via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nickdesaulniers added a comment.

Richard,
Thanks for the review, context, and suggestions.  I appreciate it.

> Can you instead change the kernel to require GCC >= 4.6 or some suitable 
> version of Clang?

Can you help me create an accurate C preprocessor check that the compiler in 
use is actually GCC and not Clang or ICC in emulation?

  #if defined(__GNU_C__) && !defined(__clang__)
  // we're gcc
  #elif defined(__clang__)
  // we're clang
  #elif defined(__INTEL_COMPILER)
  // we're icc
  #endif

Or maybe:

  #ifdef(__clang__)
  // we're clang
  #elif defined(__INTEL_COMPILER)
  // we're icc
  #else
  // default to gcc
  #endif

Maybe GCC has something better for this case than `__GNU_C__`?

Regarding the glibc headers, do you know why glibc doesn't just add code for 
`__clang__` rather than Clang (and ICC) claim to be a gcc compatible to a point 
compiler?

Regarding the command line addition, I'd prefer to fix the kernel's compiler 
detection, but I will keep your idea in mind.  It's good to have a few 
solutions in our back pockets should the preferred be shown to be faulty.

Thanks again.


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D51011



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D51011: [Preprocessor] raise gcc compatibility macros.

2018-08-20 Thread Richard Smith - zygoloid via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
rsmith added a comment.

Another possibility would be to add a command-line argument to set the version 
of GCC that clang pretends to be. We have a similar mechanism for our MSVC 
compatibility mode already.


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D51011



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D51011: [Preprocessor] raise gcc compatibility macros.

2018-08-20 Thread Richard Smith - zygoloid via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
rsmith added a comment.

We are not fully compatible with any version of GCC later than 4.2, as we do 
not implement `__builtin_va_arg_pack` / `__builtin_va_arg_pack_len`. These 
builtins are used by the glibc headers if we claim to be GCC >= 4.3 (at least 
according to 
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/UsersManual.html#gcc-extensions-not-implemented-yet),
 so this change will cause Clang to no longer compile (some versions of) the 
glibc headers.

Can you instead change the kernel to require GCC >= 4.6 or some suitable 
version of Clang?


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D51011



___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D51011: [Preprocessor] raise gcc compatibility macros.

2018-08-20 Thread Nick Desaulniers via Phabricator via cfe-commits 
nickdesaulniers created this revision.
nickdesaulniers added a reviewer: aaron.ballman.
Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits.

Building the Linux kernel with clang is now broken as of commit
cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6").

We were getting lucky that Clang previously declared compatibility with
gcc 4.2.1 as the kernel only errored out for gcc < 3.2. The compiler
check in the kernel should be improved as well.


Repository:
  rC Clang

https://reviews.llvm.org/D51011

Files:
  lib/Frontend/InitPreprocessor.cpp


Index: lib/Frontend/InitPreprocessor.cpp
===
--- lib/Frontend/InitPreprocessor.cpp
+++ lib/Frontend/InitPreprocessor.cpp
@@ -587,12 +587,12 @@
   "\"" CLANG_VERSION_STRING " "
   + getClangFullRepositoryVersion() + "\"");
   if (!LangOpts.MSVCCompat) {
-// Currently claim to be compatible with GCC 4.2.1-5621, but only if we're
+// Currently claim to be compatible with GCC 8.2, but only if we're
 // not compiling for MSVC compatibility
 Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC_MINOR__", "2");
-Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__", "1");
-Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC__", "4");
-Builder.defineMacro("__GXX_ABI_VERSION", "1002");
+Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__", "0");
+Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC__", "8");
+Builder.defineMacro("__GXX_ABI_VERSION", "1013");
   }
 
   // Define macros for the C11 / C++11 memory orderings


Index: lib/Frontend/InitPreprocessor.cpp
===
--- lib/Frontend/InitPreprocessor.cpp
+++ lib/Frontend/InitPreprocessor.cpp
@@ -587,12 +587,12 @@
   "\"" CLANG_VERSION_STRING " "
   + getClangFullRepositoryVersion() + "\"");
   if (!LangOpts.MSVCCompat) {
-// Currently claim to be compatible with GCC 4.2.1-5621, but only if we're
+// Currently claim to be compatible with GCC 8.2, but only if we're
 // not compiling for MSVC compatibility
 Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC_MINOR__", "2");
-Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__", "1");
-Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC__", "4");
-Builder.defineMacro("__GXX_ABI_VERSION", "1002");
+Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__", "0");
+Builder.defineMacro("__GNUC__", "8");
+Builder.defineMacro("__GXX_ABI_VERSION", "1013");
   }
 
   // Define macros for the C11 / C++11 memory orderings
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits