[LLVMdev] [llvm] r239035 - Include BPF target in CMake builds.

[Alexei Starovoitov]

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Daniel Sanders
<daniel.sanders at imgtec.com> wrote:
> Author: dsanders
> Date: Thu Jun  4 07:51:20 2015
> New Revision: 239035
>
> Include BPF target in CMake builds.
>
> Modified:
>     llvm/trunk/CMakeLists.txt
>
> --- llvm/trunk/CMakeLists.txt (original)
> +++ llvm/trunk/CMakeLists.txt Thu Jun  4 07:51:20 2015
> @@ -169,6 +169,7 @@ set(LLVM_INCLUDE_DIR ${CMAKE_CURRENT_BIN
>  set(LLVM_ALL_TARGETS
>    AArch64
>    ARM
> +  BPF
>    CppBackend

wow :)
this is what I wanted to propose for the last few months.
I had a chat with Chandler about graduating BPF backend
from experimental, but I want to make sure everyone is ok
before proceeding.
Current status of it:
- running on x64, arm64, s390 architectures
- projects that use it: perf, tc, ovs
- there are few front-ends in the works:
 one is translating language X to C and then using clang/llvm,
 another is generating llvm IR directly,
 yet another is using clang rewriter to augment C language
 for tracing/networking needs.
 one project tried to hack clang overall and was abandoned.
- I've seen people embedding binary llc with bpf support
 in their github projects.
- broken llvm build with bpf backend was reported many
 times with few folks even provided simple patches to unbreak it.
- we've started to prepare buildbot specific to bpf, but hit
 configuration issues with zorg. Hopefully it will be functional soon.
- as far as I can see all across the board api refactoring that
 was done by a bunch of people over the last 5 month
 didn't cause any problems for them or for the backend

bpf backend has been in-tree since January and has enough
users, so I think it's time to graduate it from experimental.
Honestly I was surprised to see this patch... I was hoping
it will be my honors to do it ;)