On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 6:54 AM Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 4:06 PM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 8:45 AM Masahiro Yamada > > <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > We do not support old Clang versions. Upgrade your clang version > > > if any of these flags is unsupported. > > > > > > Let's add flags within ifdef CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG unconditionally, > > > except -fcatch-undefined-behavior. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Looks good to me. > > > > Reviewed-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Just as sidenote: > > I experimented with a snapshot version of clang-9 and lld-9 and could > > build, link and boot on bare-metal with '-mglobal-merge' on > > Debian/buster AMD64. > > > The comment says > # CLANG uses a _MergedGlobals as optimization, but this breaks modpost, as the > # source of a reference will be _MergedGlobals and not on of the > whitelisted names. > # See modpost pattern 2 > > So, it seems it is just a matter of modpost, > but I am not sure enough. > > This flag has been here since the initial support. > (61163efae02040f66a95c8ed17f4407951ba58fa) > > > Perhaps, we should review clang flags one by one again? Yes, it's always good to re-evaluate if something is just cruft and can be removed. +Behan I don't quite understand the comment about _MergedGlobals, Behan, do happen to have more context? -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
