[PATCH] D130255: [Clang][LoongArch] Add initial LoongArch target and driver support

Mon Jul 25 02:40:04 PDT 2022

xry111 added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Gnu.cpp:2226

+  static const char *const LoongArch64LibDirs[] = {"/lib64", "/lib"};
+  static const char *const LoongArch64Triples[] = {
----------------
SixWeining wrote:
> xry111 wrote:
> > SixWeining wrote:
> > > MaskRay wrote:
> > > > I don't know which of /lib64, /lib has been used. For purity, I'd hope that we just have /lib, no multilib style /lib64
> > > I also don't know the actual usage of /lib64 but I just tried and it works fine if I remove /lib64.
> > I don't like `lib64` too.  But for LoongArch LP64D, the path to ELF interpreter is hard coded `/lib64/ld-linux-loongarch-lp64d.so.1` and it seems too late to change it.  And LoongArch GCC installs libstdc++ etc. for LP64D into $PREFIX/lib64 by default (like x86_64).
> > 
> > As a distro (LFS) maintainer: we are already hacking GCC code to get rid of `/usr/lib64`.
> Thanks for the quick reply. So I should keep the /lib64 here?
I think you should keep it.  A multilib distro may have `/usr/lib64`, `/usr/lib32`, and `/usr/lib32sf` (`sf` for soft float or whatever) and make `/usr/lib` a symlink.  A "mostly 32-bit distro" may have symlink `/usr/lib` -> `/usr/lib32`, but still capable to build & run LA64 programs with libraries in `/usr/lib64`.  Removing `lib64` will break clang on such distros with `-mabi=64`.

Personally, I don't like `lib64`.  But we can't really predict what the distro maintainers will do (unless you say something explicitly like "a LP64D capable distro SHALL have LP64D libraries in `/usr/lib`" in a spec).

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D130255/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D130255