Hi all,
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 16:12 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:19 PM Joe Perches wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>> > > Not this case; it's how we get gnu89
Hi all,
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 16:12 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:19 PM Joe Perches wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>> > > Not this case; it's how we get gnu89
On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 16:12 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:19 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > > One reply for a bunch of the various threads, to keep the number of
> > > emails down:
> > >
> > > On Wed,
On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 16:12 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:19 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > > One reply for a bunch of the various threads, to keep the number of
> > > emails down:
> > >
> > > On Wed,
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:19 PM Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > One reply for a bunch of the various threads, to keep the number of emails
> > down:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:20 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:37
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 2:19 PM Joe Perches wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > One reply for a bunch of the various threads, to keep the number of emails
> > down:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:20 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:37
Nick Desaulniers wrote on Thu, Aug 23, 2018:
> > On a side note, I noticed tools/include/linux/compiler.h includes
> > linux/compiler-gcc.h but maybe it should include linux/compiler_types.h?
> > (I'm not sure at who uses that header, so it really is an open question
> > here)
>
> Without looking
Nick Desaulniers wrote on Thu, Aug 23, 2018:
> > On a side note, I noticed tools/include/linux/compiler.h includes
> > linux/compiler-gcc.h but maybe it should include linux/compiler_types.h?
> > (I'm not sure at who uses that header, so it really is an open question
> > here)
>
> Without looking
On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> One reply for a bunch of the various threads, to keep the number of emails
> down:
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:20 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:37 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > > +/* Compiler specific
On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> One reply for a bunch of the various threads, to keep the number of emails
> down:
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:20 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:37 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > > +/* Compiler specific
On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> One of these days, I'll get frustrated enough to
> rewrite checkpatch.pl as a set of clang tidy checks (so that it
> actually parses the code), but I'll have to learn how to read perl
> first to start translating.
Good luck with that,
On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 14:03 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> One of these days, I'll get frustrated enough to
> rewrite checkpatch.pl as a set of clang tidy checks (so that it
> actually parses the code), but I'll have to learn how to read perl
> first to start translating.
Good luck with that,
One reply for a bunch of the various threads, to keep the number of emails down:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:20 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:37 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > +/* Compiler specific macros. */
> > #ifdef __clang__
> > #include
>
> probably better as
>
>
One reply for a bunch of the various threads, to keep the number of emails down:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:20 PM Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:37 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > +/* Compiler specific macros. */
> > #ifdef __clang__
> > #include
>
> probably better as
>
>
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 6:02 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:25 PM Dominique Martinet
> wrote:
>>
>> Overall looks good to me, just pointing at the same error I wrote in my
>> other mail here -- I saw that by the time I was done writing this this
>> patch got taken but that
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 6:02 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:25 PM Dominique Martinet
> wrote:
>>
>> Overall looks good to me, just pointing at the same error I wrote in my
>> other mail here -- I saw that by the time I was done writing this this
>> patch got taken but that
Hi Nick
2018-08-23 8:37 GMT+09:00 Nick Desaulniers :
> Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
> recently exposed a brittle part of the build for supporting non-gcc
> compilers.
>
> Both Clang and ICC define __GNUC__, __GNUC_MINOR__, and
> __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ for
Hi Nick
2018-08-23 8:37 GMT+09:00 Nick Desaulniers :
> Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
> recently exposed a brittle part of the build for supporting non-gcc
> compilers.
>
> Both Clang and ICC define __GNUC__, __GNUC_MINOR__, and
> __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ for
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 6:10 PM Dominique Martinet
wrote:
>
> I'm not building linux directly, but BPF programs that indirectly uses
> clang with bcc
Oh, ok.
I _can_ test the basic build (just not get a working link and a
kernel) by just forcing it, so I guess I'll call that testing enough.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 6:10 PM Dominique Martinet
wrote:
>
> I'm not building linux directly, but BPF programs that indirectly uses
> clang with bcc
Oh, ok.
I _can_ test the basic build (just not get a working link and a
kernel) by just forcing it, so I guess I'll call that testing enough.
Linus Torvalds wrote on Wed, Aug 22, 2018:
> I've fixed that manually, but when I tried to test it I just hit the
>
> arch/x86/Makefile:179: *** Compiler lacks asm-goto support.. Stop.
>
> error.
>
> Do you have some experimental clang build with asm goto support? What
> version? Or is it
Linus Torvalds wrote on Wed, Aug 22, 2018:
> I've fixed that manually, but when I tried to test it I just hit the
>
> arch/x86/Makefile:179: *** Compiler lacks asm-goto support.. Stop.
>
> error.
>
> Do you have some experimental clang build with asm goto support? What
> version? Or is it
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:25 PM Dominique Martinet
wrote:
>
> Overall looks good to me, just pointing at the same error I wrote in my
> other mail here -- I saw that by the time I was done writing this this
> patch got taken but that alone will probably warrant a follow-up :/
I've fixed that
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:25 PM Dominique Martinet
wrote:
>
> Overall looks good to me, just pointing at the same error I wrote in my
> other mail here -- I saw that by the time I was done writing this this
> patch got taken but that alone will probably warrant a follow-up :/
I've fixed that
Nick Desaulniers wrote on Wed, Aug 22, 2018:
> Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
> recently exposed a brittle part of the build for supporting non-gcc
> compilers.
>
> Both Clang and ICC define __GNUC__, __GNUC_MINOR__, and
> __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ for quick
Nick Desaulniers wrote on Wed, Aug 22, 2018:
> Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
> recently exposed a brittle part of the build for supporting non-gcc
> compilers.
>
> Both Clang and ICC define __GNUC__, __GNUC_MINOR__, and
> __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ for quick
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:39 PM Nick Desaulniers
wrote:
>
> Rather than always including compiler-gcc.h then undefining or
> redefining macros in compiler-intel.h or compiler-clang.h, let's
> separate out the compiler specific macro definitions into mutually
> exclusive headers, do more proper
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:39 PM Nick Desaulniers
wrote:
>
> Rather than always including compiler-gcc.h then undefining or
> redefining macros in compiler-intel.h or compiler-clang.h, let's
> separate out the compiler specific macro definitions into mutually
> exclusive headers, do more proper
On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:37 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
> recently exposed a brittle part of the build for supporting non-gcc
> compilers.
style trivia:
> diff --git a/include/linux/compiler_types.h
On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:37 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
> recently exposed a brittle part of the build for supporting non-gcc
> compilers.
style trivia:
> diff --git a/include/linux/compiler_types.h
Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
recently exposed a brittle part of the build for supporting non-gcc
compilers.
Both Clang and ICC define __GNUC__, __GNUC_MINOR__, and
__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ for quick compatibility with code bases that haven't
added compiler
Commit cafa0010cd51 ("Raise the minimum required gcc version to 4.6")
recently exposed a brittle part of the build for supporting non-gcc
compilers.
Both Clang and ICC define __GNUC__, __GNUC_MINOR__, and
__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ for quick compatibility with code bases that haven't
added compiler
32 matches
Mail list logo
