On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 at 09:22, <jan.som...@dlr.de> wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Hesham Almatary <heshamelmat...@gmail.com> > > Sent: Montag, 13. Februar 2023 16:19 > > To: Sommer, Jan <jan.som...@dlr.de> > > Cc: j...@rtems.org; devel@rtems.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] Update rtems-llvm to version 11.1.0 > > > > On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 12:12, <jan.som...@dlr.de> wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> > > > > Sent: Freitag, 10. Februar 2023 15:21 > > > > To: Sommer, Jan <jan.som...@dlr.de> > > > > Cc: devel@rtems.org > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/1] Update rtems-llvm to version 11.1.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 3:16 AM Jan Sommer <jan.som...@dlr.de > > > > <mailto:jan.som...@dlr.de> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I couldn't get the rtems-llvm buildset to work. > > > > As it was building llvm8 which is not that modern, I just tried > > > > to build > > > > a more recent version with the scripts. > > > > It works with llvm11. Are there any objections to updating? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope. Please feel free to add this. > > > > > > > > > > > > And should we keep the rtems-llvm-8.cfg or should I remove > > > > this with > > > > this patch? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My main concern is if the architectures that built with llvm 8 > > > > still build with llvm 11. I think that's only SPARC and RISC-V. Are > > > > there > > others? > > > > > > Why not the latest LLVM (especially to pick up the latest RISC-V > > fixes/support). I am not sure how mature the RISC-V support is in LLVM 8, if > > it was supported at all. > > > > Yes, that is also my goal. I got llvm11 building with only small changes to > the buildset and wanted to go from there. > In the meantime I also managed to build llvm up to 14 locally. Once I have > all the bits and pieces working to some degree I will probably consolidate to > a more recent version. > Seems like a good plan.
> > > > I guess that points to me not knowing the list of architectures that > > > > are expected to work. I wonder where we would keep this information. > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the information. > > > I tried to build those to check if they still work and failed, but given > > > that the > > information I could find is sparse I could very well be the problem. > > > What I did is: > > > - Build the gcc toolchains for sparc and riscv (as far as I understand > > > we need the binutils and libc from that) > > I haven't tried doing that for RISC-V. I used to build newlib manually, and > > not > > rely on GCC/binutils. > > > > Ah, I see. Just for clarification you also cross-built newlib with clang? > Yes, besides compiler-rt (LLVM's version of libgcc). But you don't need to go all the way there, you can just use GCC's newlib. > > > - Build the rtems-llvm build set > > > - Generate a config for waf using: ./waf bspdefaults > > > --rtems-bsps='sparc/gr712rc' --rtems-compiler=clang > sparc.cfg > > > - Configure the build with the config: ./waf configure > > > --rtems-config=sparc.cfg -$INSTALL_DIR > > > - Run ./waf > > > - I also tried with some riscv BSPs with the same results. > > > > > > The build fails with missing std headers (stddef.h). > > > Looking at the generated config file there are only small differences to > > > the > > one for gcc (essentially the compiler name changed to clang). > > > And the verbose output confirms that the gcc toolchain is not part of the > > include paths. > > > I didn't find an obvious option in "waf configure" to add this. > > I added [1] an option for "sysroot" in the old build system so that Clang > > could > > find the C library. I don't think that was integrated in waf. However, I > > was also > > using CHERI-based LLVM with a modified Driver so that it automatically > > fetches the C library (after it gets manually built and installed under a > > convenient LLVM) related to the LLVM install path. > > > > [1] > > https://github.com/RTEMS/rtems/commit/94481cedc4165f6a49ef528709825 > > 1740922fee1 > > > > Ah, thanks for this. I think this is a good starting point to experiment with. > > Best regards, > > Jan > > > > If you say that building worked only for few BSPs. Do you remember which > > ones and if there was some magic to do first? > > > Then I could try to reproduce this with the llvm11 compiler. > > I don't think they'll build as is without a few modifications to the build > > system. Simplest thing to do is to use GCC's libgcc and newlib and add a > > "sysroot" or "-L -I" options to the current build system for them. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > --joel > > > > > > > > > > > > Have a nice weekend, > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > Jan Sommer (1): > > > > rtems-tools: Update rtems-llvm to version 11.1.0 > > > > > > > > rtems/config/6/rtems-llvm.bset | 2 +- > > > > rtems/config/tools/rtems-llvm-11.1.0.cfg | 21 > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > source-builder/config/llvm-common-1.cfg | 6 +++--- > > > > 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > create mode 100644 rtems/config/tools/rtems-llvm-11.1.0.cfg > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.25.1 > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > devel mailing list > > > > devel@rtems.org <mailto:devel@rtems.org> > > > > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > devel mailing list > > > devel@rtems.org > > > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Hesham -- Regards, Hesham _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
