linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] sparc/build: Rework CFLAGS for clang compatibility

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20241027183440.GA2755311@thelio-3990X>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 11:34:40 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To: Koakuma <koachan@...tonmail.com>
Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
	Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de,
	Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] sparc/build: Rework CFLAGS for clang compatibility

On Sat, Oct 26, 2024 at 02:52:52PM +0000, Koakuma wrote:
> Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> wrote:
> > I think this should be documented (required LLVM version and
> > the supported build command),
> > otherwise people cannot test this patch.
> 
> Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > I am not sure that there is a super concise way to describe for
> > Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst that sparc currently requires 'CC=clang
> > LLVM_IAS=0' along with a build of clang from the main branch of
> > llvm-project to work properly.
> 
> So about this, as a middle ground, would it be okay if I put
> 
> ``CC=clang LLVM_IAS=0`` (LLVM >= 20)
> 
> In the documentation, in a similar manner to the s390x entry?
> I know that LLVM 20 is still a couple months away but those commits will
> likely be released with that version, and since it also tells people
> to not use a version that is too old, I think it should be okay (?)

Yes, I think that would be reasonable.

Cheers,
Nathan