[llvm-commits] new patches for compiling linux with integrated-as

[Jan-Simon Möller]

Hi all,

The team of llvmlinux (llvm.linuxfoundation.org) and I offer to assist here. 
We'll split up the patches in chunks and send them in thematic chunks for 
review/comment.
I'm half through the patchset already and added testcases as far as I could.

I can do finish and post the individual patches tomorrow night.

Best,
JS
Am Sonntag, 4. November 2012, 17:18:38 schrieb Chandler Carruth:
> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 12:36 PM, PaX Team <pageexec at freemail.hu> wrote:
> > On 4 Nov 2012 at 12:04, Eli Friedman wrote:
> >> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:57 AM, PaX Team <pageexec at freemail.hu> wrote:
> >> > hello folks,
> >> > 
> >> > here's the latest batch of patches that are needed for compiling linux
> >> > (the kernel).
> >> > 
> >> > - .octa support: this is a GNU as keyword used by some crypto code in
> >> > linux.>> > 
> >> >   nothing changed since the last submission last spring, would be nice
> >> >   if someone looked at it finally ;). as i said back then, this is a
> >> >   minimal implementation, full 128 bit expression support would
> >> >   require way too many changes (APInt would have to be used throughout
> >> >   in MCExpr).
> >> > 
> >> > - more .cfi* support: linux makes use of 3 CFI directives not yet
> >> > (fully) supported>> > 
> >> >   by llvm.
> >> >   
> >> >   .cfi_startproc simple: i added the 'simple' keyword recognition but a
> >> >   review is needed.
> >> >   
> >> >   .cfi_undefined: new directive, it's only recognized, someone else
> >> >   will have to provide a proper implementation in
> >> >   MCStreamer::EmitCFIUndefined.
> >> >   
> >> >   .cfi_register: new directive, i think MCStreamer::EmitCFIRegister
> >> >   does what it should do, but review (and help with fixing it up :) is
> >> >   needed.
> >> > 
> >> > - more macro args changes: most of the macro default arg handling stuff
> >> > is now in>> > 
> >> >   llvm, these are the remaining bits in my tree that allow nesting and
> >> >   fix up whitespace separated parameter handling and add some
> >> >   comments. right now one of the macro tests fails, but i didn't
> >> >   figure out yet what i managed to overlook, help is appreciated :).>> > 
> >> > - x86 signed reloc handling: as i said last time, llvm generates wrong
> >> > code in linux>> > 
> >> >   and short of someone figuring out how to properly recognize the
> >> >   affected insns, this is a minimal fix.
> >> > 
> >> > cheers,
> >> > 
> >> >   PaX Team
> >> 
> >> Please send one patch per email.  Please include testcases in each patch.
> > 
> > i didn't mean to submit these patches for inclusion, but more like a
> > request for comments/help on the approach in each. can you/anyone help me
> > out there?
> While I agree with Eli (especially about starting off with test
> cases), I also want to clarify something:
> 
> There is *definite* interest in this. And if you're trying to choose
> which to send first, I would vote for the macro args one. We recently
> hit this as well, and would be interested in working with you to get
> support implemented. CC-ing Nick who has been looking at these issues,
> he would likely be a good reviewer candidate.
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits