[Mesa-dev] [PATCH v3 04/25] configure.ac: Move oCL checks out of LLVM version check

[Emil Velikov]

On 12 October 2016 at 19:58, Tobias Droste <tdroste at gmx.de> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 12. Oktober 2016, 19:51:21 CEST schrieb Emil Velikov:
>> On 12 October 2016 at 19:04, Tobias Droste <tdroste at gmx.de> wrote:
>> > Am Mittwoch, 12. Oktober 2016, 09:56:39 CEST schrieb Emil Velikov:
>> >> >  fi
>> >> >
>> >> > +if test "x$enable_opencl" = xyes; then
>> >> > +    llvm_check_version_for "3" "6" "0" "opencl"
>> >> > +
>> >> > +    LLVM_COMPONENTS="${LLVM_COMPONENTS} all-targets ipo linker
>> >> > instrumentation" +    LLVM_COMPONENTS="${LLVM_COMPONENTS} irreader
>> >> > option
>> >> > objcarcopts profiledata" +fi
>> >> > +
>> >> > +dnl Check for Clang internal headers
>> >> > +if test "x$enable_opencl" = xyes; then
>> >>
>> >> Nit: drop the second if test, yet preserve the comment ?
>> >> Disclaimer: haven't looked if later patches depend on the split.
>> >
>> > This is a "just move" patch, that's why I didn't change anything.
>> > But this whole section will be changed later (Patch 11) so it actually
>> > doesn't matter.
>>
>> Patch 11... this hunks get moved once here and a second time in there.
>> Just move it to the "top" from the start, fold the conditional and as
>> you do further movement keep it in the same block ?
>>
>> Sure I suggested to keep things separate, but it sounds like we got
>> from one end/extreme to the other.
>> Emil
>
> No at this point in time it sadly has to be below the other gallium stuff,
> because it uses LLVM variables but I need it outside the LLVM config stuff to
> have this function later without any code that throws errors.
>
> (Forgot the mailing list again)
>
> PS:
> This is the reason I didn't want to split this stuff and have it build
> correctly. There's a lot of stuff that needs to be in the right order to work.
> That's also the reason the oCL stuff is here and not where it actually
> belongs!
>
In general - divide and concur. If the latter isn't working out the
former needs refinement.

I'm starting to wonder if I shouldn't give it a bash myself rather
than nitpicking like an old bat ?

-Emil