2016-06-24 16:02 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith :
> Hello Lei,
>
> They look good enough for me. Unless anyone else has any objections I
> think you are good to go.
I just see them committed by r273735 in clang and r273726 in LLVM.
Peter, thank you for the comments; and Rafael, thank you for
committing th
Hello Lei,
They look good enough for me. Unless anyone else has any objections I
think you are good to go.
Peter
On 24 June 2016 at 04:25, Lei Zhang wrote:
> 2016-06-22 16:55 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith :
>> Hello Lei,
>>
>> Thanks for all the updates. That looks good to me from an ARM perspective.
>
2016-06-22 16:55 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith :
> Hello Lei,
>
> Thanks for all the updates. That looks good to me from an ARM perspective.
Ping.
Are the patches good enough to be committed?
Lei
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://
Hello Lei,
Thanks for all the updates. That looks good to me from an ARM perspective.
Peter
On 22 June 2016 at 09:03, Lei Zhang wrote:
> 2016-06-21 23:07 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith :
>> Hello Lei,
>>
>> The changes to llvm and clang look ok to me. I've got some suggestions
>> for testing.
>>
>> For
2016-06-21 23:07 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith :
> Hello Lei,
>
> The changes to llvm and clang look ok to me. I've got some suggestions
> for testing.
>
> For the clang patch, it looks like there isn't a test to check that
> musleabihf implies hard floating point. It looks like
> Driver/arm-mfpu.c CHECK-H
Hello Lei,
The changes to llvm and clang look ok to me. I've got some suggestions
for testing.
For the clang patch, it looks like there isn't a test to check that
musleabihf implies hard floating point. It looks like
Driver/arm-mfpu.c CHECK-HF might be a good candidate to add a test.
For the llv
2016-06-20 19:05 GMT+08:00 Lei Zhang :
> 2016-06-18 8:52 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
>> There are probably a few more places that need to be patched.
>>
>> In particular, take a look at lib/Target/ARM. There are things like
>> computeTargetABI and isTargetHardFloat that probably need to be
>> upda
2016-06-20 19:44 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith :
> From what I can see, the EABI type is used to decide if certain
> __aeabi_ prefixed functions such as __aeabi_idiv are available. If
> Musl differs in function availability from the GNU library here I
> think you'll need a Musl EABI type. However if there
* Lei Zhang [2016-06-20 18:59:20 +0800]:
> 2016-06-20 17:37 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith :
> > - isTargetEHABICompatible()
> > I'm making the assumption that musl supports the ARM exceptions EHABI,
> > if so you'll want to add MUSL and MUSLHF here.
>
> I'm not 100% sure about this. Could some insider fr
From what I can see, the EABI type is used to decide if certain
__aeabi_ prefixed functions such as __aeabi_idiv are available. If
Musl differs in function availability from the GNU library here I
think you'll need a Musl EABI type. However if there is no difference
you should be able to use the EA
2016-06-18 8:52 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
> There are probably a few more places that need to be patched.
>
> In particular, take a look at lib/Target/ARM. There are things like
> computeTargetABI and isTargetHardFloat that probably need to be
> updated (and tested).
Any hints how to test the n
2016-06-20 17:37 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith :
> Hello Lei,
Hi, thanks for your reply!
> I agree with Rafael that this is currently missing a few critical
> things right now, especially in the llvm patch.
>
> My (limited) understanding of musl is that it intends to support the
> same interface as GNUEA
Hello Lei,
I agree with Rafael that this is currently missing a few critical
things right now, especially in the llvm patch.
My (limited) understanding of musl is that it intends to support the
same interface as GNUEABI and GNUEABIHF, but it is obviously a
different implementation.
This is what
There are probably a few more places that need to be patched.
In particular, take a look at lib/Target/ARM. There are things like
computeTargetABI and isTargetHardFloat that probably need to be
updated (and tested).
CCing Peter for an arm opinion.
Cheers,
Rafael
On 17 June 2016 at 05:50, Lei Z
2016-06-15 16:28 GMT+08:00 Lei Zhang :
> Here's another patch including test cases for various non-x86 archs,
> which should just work with my previous patches. ARM is left out
> purposely since it involves extra complexity. I'll work on it later.
Hi,
Here are another two patches which add suppor
r272825,
Thanks,
Rafael
On 15 June 2016 at 04:28, Lei Zhang wrote:
> 2016-06-14 20:55 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
>> On 13 June 2016 at 21:07, Lei Zhang wrote:
>>> 2016-06-14 5:00 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
Do you need someone to commit it for you?
>>>
>>> Yes, please :)
>>
>> Committe
2016-06-14 20:55 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
> On 13 June 2016 at 21:07, Lei Zhang wrote:
>> 2016-06-14 5:00 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
>>> Do you need someone to commit it for you?
>>
>> Yes, please :)
>
> Committed.
Thanks!
Here's another patch including test cases for various non-x86 archs
On 13 June 2016 at 21:07, Lei Zhang wrote:
> 2016-06-14 5:00 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
>> Do you need someone to commit it for you?
>
> Yes, please :)
Committed.
Cheers,
Rafael
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llv
* Rafael Esp?ndola [2016-06-13 17:00:17 -0400]:
> Do you need someone to commit it for you?
> On Jun 13, 2016 9:50 AM, "Lei Zhang via cfe-commits" <
> > http://git.alpinelinux.org/cgit/aports/plain/main/clang/clang-0004-Add-musl-targets-and-dynamic-linker.patch
> >
> > This looks neat :)
the dyna
2016-06-14 5:00 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
> Do you need someone to commit it for you?
Yes, please :)
Lei
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Do you need someone to commit it for you?
On Jun 13, 2016 9:50 AM, "Lei Zhang via cfe-commits" <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 2016-06-13 21:21 GMT+08:00 Felix Janda :
> > [Added CC to the musl list]
> >
> > Lei Zhang wrote:
> >> 2016-06-13 3:07 GMT+08:00 Joerg Sonnenberger :
> >> > On Sun,
2016-06-13 21:21 GMT+08:00 Felix Janda :
> [Added CC to the musl list]
>
> Lei Zhang wrote:
>> 2016-06-13 3:07 GMT+08:00 Joerg Sonnenberger :
>> > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 10:51:11AM +0800, Lei Zhang via llvm-commits wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I'm replying to this thread; sorry I wasn't subscribed
On 13 June 2016 at 09:25, Lei Zhang wrote:
> 2016-06-13 21:02 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
>> Should musl really be an environment? What happens when targeting ARM,
>> do we get a gnueabi+musl? Is it used as an environment when
>> configuring gcc?
>
> Honestly I couldn't judge if musl *should* be
2016-06-13 21:02 GMT+08:00 Rafael Espíndola :
> Should musl really be an environment? What happens when targeting ARM,
> do we get a gnueabi+musl? Is it used as an environment when
> configuring gcc?
Honestly I couldn't judge if musl *should* be an environment. But it
*is* used as an environment w
[Added CC to the musl list]
Lei Zhang wrote:
> 2016-06-13 3:07 GMT+08:00 Joerg Sonnenberger :
> > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 10:51:11AM +0800, Lei Zhang via llvm-commits wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm replying to this thread; sorry I wasn't subscribed to the list,
> >> thus cannot reply to it directly
Should musl really be an environment? What happens when targeting ARM,
do we get a gnueabi+musl? Is it used as an environment when
configuring gcc?
Cheers,
Rafael
On 13 June 2016 at 08:20, Lei Zhang via cfe-commits
wrote:
> 2016-06-13 3:07 GMT+08:00 Joerg Sonnenberger :
>> On Sun, Jun 12, 2016
2016-06-13 3:07 GMT+08:00 Joerg Sonnenberger :
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 10:51:11AM +0800, Lei Zhang via llvm-commits wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm replying to this thread; sorry I wasn't subscribed to the list,
>> thus cannot reply to it directly.
>>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-o
On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 10:51:11AM +0800, Lei Zhang via llvm-commits wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm replying to this thread; sorry I wasn't subscribed to the list,
> thus cannot reply to it directly.
>
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20160606/161733.html
>
> Joerg, thanks for you
Hi,
I'm replying to this thread; sorry I wasn't subscribed to the list,
thus cannot reply to it directly.
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/Week-of-Mon-20160606/161733.html
Joerg, thanks for your reply. Could you please tell me what kind of
test cases I should prepare?
Thanks,
Lei
__
On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 03:14:38PM +0800, Lei Zhang via llvm-commits wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The first patch introduces musl as a new environment type in LLVM; the
> second helps clang to find musl's dynamic linker, which has a
> different naming scheme from glibc's.
>
> The two patches together enable
Hi,
The first patch introduces musl as a new environment type in LLVM; the
second helps clang to find musl's dynamic linker, which has a
different naming scheme from glibc's.
The two patches together enable clang to support targets like
"x86_64-pc-linux-musl" and build binaries against musl-libc
31 matches
Mail list logo
