> From: Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <[email protected]>
> Cc: Mark Kettenis <[email protected]>, Patrick Wildt <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 02:03:10 +0100
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> On Mon, Oct 25 2021, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 25 2021, Patrick Wildt <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Am Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 11:43:55AM +0200 schrieb Mark Kettenis:
> >>> > From: Jeremie Courreges-Anglas <[email protected]>
> >>> > Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2021 17:30:46 +0100
> >>> >
> >>> > clang(1) defaults to FP ABI but ld(1) -melf64lriscv doesn't. This is
> >>> > a problem as soon as a port tries to use raw ld(1) -b binary to embed
> >>> > data in a .o file.
> >>> >
> >>> > Downgrading this hard error to a warning seems more useful as far as the
> >>> > ports tree is concerned. The diff below fixes
> >>> > databases/postgresql-pllua and should also fix textproc/mupdf and
> >>> > net/utox.
> >>> >
> >>> > There's another diff here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D106378
> >>> > but it's slightly more complicated and it received seemingly negative
> >>> > feedback. So I'm just using a minimal change to fit our needs.
> >>> >
> >>> > ok?
> >>>
> >>> I think we should try to avoid deviating from upstream as much as
> >>> possible. And I agree with the folks who argue that the mismatching
> >>> objects are created with the wrong tools.
> >
> > Well the only alternative they suggest is using assembly and .incbin.
> > Maybe that works for the FreeBSD folks working on low-level stuff, but
> > not so much as a general purpose tool to include binary data in builds.
> >
> >>> But if mortimer@ and
> >>> patrick@ can deal with carrying this local modification I won't
> >>> object.
> >
> > I can't speak for them but given the local changes we have in clang and
> > lld land this two lines diff doesn't seem daunting. ;)
> >
> >> Well, I was about to send an LLVM 13 diff... so can we revisit this diff
> >> when we're updated to LLVM 13?
>
> I have added comments on https://reviews.llvm.org/D106378#3219454 but
> the discussion has stalled again (I'll try to revive it).
>
> I'm still using the diff below on the riscv64 ports build machines, and
> I'd like to get rid of the burden of keeping it in my tree.
>
> ok?
ok kettenis@
> Index: ELF/Arch/RISCV.cpp
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/gnu/llvm/lld/ELF/Arch/RISCV.cpp,v
> retrieving revision 1.1.1.3
> diff -u -p -r1.1.1.3 RISCV.cpp
> --- ELF/Arch/RISCV.cpp 17 Dec 2021 12:25:02 -0000 1.1.1.3
> +++ ELF/Arch/RISCV.cpp 28 Jan 2022 09:11:18 -0000
> @@ -124,8 +124,8 @@ uint32_t RISCV::calcEFlags() const {
> target |= EF_RISCV_RVC;
>
> if ((eflags & EF_RISCV_FLOAT_ABI) != (target & EF_RISCV_FLOAT_ABI))
> - error(toString(f) +
> - ": cannot link object files with different floating-point ABI");
> + warn(toString(f) +
> + ": linking object files with different floating-point ABI");
>
> if ((eflags & EF_RISCV_RVE) != (target & EF_RISCV_RVE))
> error(toString(f) +
>
>
> --
> jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
>
