[gentoo-musl] Re: Add support for musl-libc on Linux

Peter Smith via cfe-commits cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Wed Jun 22 01:55:25 PDT 2016

Hello Lei,

Thanks for all the updates. That looks good to me from an ARM perspective.


On 22 June 2016 at 09:03, Lei Zhang <zhanglei.april at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2016-06-21 23:07 GMT+08:00 Peter Smith <peter.smith at linaro.org>:
>> 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 llvm patch
>> I think you should be able to find a test that checks the behaviour of
>> GNUEABI and GNUEABIHF for each of the properties that you've added
>> Subtarget->isTargetMuslAEABI() to or equivalent. It would be useful to
>> add a test case for MUSLEABI and/or MUSLEABIHF. For example in the
>> RTLIB case there are a large number of tests that check whether the
>> correct __aeabi_ function is called.
>> Some files I came across (there are many more) that might be a good
>> place to check that musleabi and musleabihf behaves like gnueabi and
>> gnueabihf:
>> CodeGen/ARM/memfunc.ll
>> CodeGen/Thumb2/float-ops.ll
>> CodeGen/ARM/divmod-eabi.ll
>> CodeGen/ARM/fp16.ll (hard-float for HF)
>> MC/ARM/eh-directives-personalityindex.s
> Thanks for the pointers! Please see the refined (again) patches.
> As a side note, there's no "gnueabi" in float-ops.ll or
> eh-directive-personalityindex.s, so I skipped them. In addition, I
> found a few other relevant test files to patch thanks to your advice.
> Lei

More information about the cfe-commits mailing list