[cfe-dev] Bugs with arm-none-eabi

Renato Golin via cfe-dev cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Mar 16 03:09:04 PDT 2016


On 15 March 2016 at 21:07, Abe Clements via cfe-dev
<cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Is anyone working on these bugs?  If not where would I start to fix them?

Hi Abe,

I'm copying llvm-dev, since this is an LLVM matter, not a Clang one.

If the bug is not assigned to anyone, you can assume no one is working
on it. If you assign it to yourself and no one complains, you can be
sure of it. :)


> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=25495

This is not so trivial, and the answer might just be that we won't
support it by design. But it may not. So what you have to do is to
gather all information about macros and their usage in inline
assembly, including links to documentations, email threads, etc. Then
you need to have a try at implementing it, most likely you'll have to
modify ARMAsmParser.cpp, and present your changes with the initial
analysis.

Why the bureaucracy? Because GNU extensions are riddled with
undocumented bugs that got abused, then became features, and now
they're "supported", but still undocumented. Being in a different
community, we don't have enough visibility on whether they think this
is a good hack that must stay, or a bad one that no one has removed
yet. Thus, it's quite possible that GNU's behaviour changes from the
specific undocumented implementation A to another, equally
undocumented B, and people will now fill bugs again on LLVM.


> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=25508

I've seen movement in the list about a similar case.

Check commit r258504 and the fallout, which was covered by the review
http://reviews.llvm.org/D17183.

May be relevant to this case.

Also, I believe ARM was working to clean up all macros, so I'm copying
some ARM folks to give you a hand on the state of the macros.

cheers,
--renato


More information about the cfe-dev mailing list