[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 4/6] configure.ac: Set and use HAVE_GALLIUM_LLVM define

[Jose Fonseca]

I've reverted this and took a closer look.

I'm fine with autoconf glue doing whatever: HAVE_LLVM -> 
HAVE_GALLIUM_LLVM and what not.

But I'm afraid I can't accept replacing HAVE_LLVM in the .c code, because:
- it breaks the other build systems if not updated
- but above all, it creates merge conflicts in branches, work in 
progress changes, etc, as HAVE_LLVM define appears all over the place.

So, could we please rework the series so .c code is left alone?

Jose

On 18/01/17 14:40, Jose Fonseca wrote:
> This change was commited and completely broke scons build.
>
> It's also the first time I see HAVE_GALLIUM_LLVM name.  I don't mind if
> people fiddle with autoconf and break it as much as they want, but
> please don't fiddle with gallium/llvmpipe .C code without me or Roland's
> review or acked by.
>
> I'm going to revert the series now.
>
> Jose
>
>
> On 16/12/16 17:11, Tobias Droste wrote:
>> Hey Emil,
>>
>> did you have to time look at this?
>> What should we do?
>>
>> I would argue to first merge what I have now and if you really want to
>> disallow llvm-less gallium with llvm-full radv we could do this later and
>> revert the changes of patch 4.
>>
>> Personally I think it's ok how it is now. Gallium with its optional dependency
>> is a special case in mesa and that's why it is handled in special way (patch
>> 4). All other users have a hard requirement.
>>
>> Tobias
>>
>> Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016, 23:02:36 CET schrieb Tobias Droste:
>>> Am Donnerstag, 8. Dezember 2016, 17:14:12 CET schrieb Emil Velikov:
>>>> On 8 December 2016 at 02:03, Tobias Droste <tdroste at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>> Gallium code used HAVE_LLVM to check if it needs to compile code for
>>>>> LLVM in header and source files.
>>>>>
>>>>> With the new logic HAVE_LLVM is always set. Use extra define to figure
>>>>> out if LLVM is used.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99010
>>>>
>>>> If you agree with the comment in 2/6 we can drop this patch. Unless
>>>> I'm missing something ?
>>>>
>>>> Emil
>>>
>>> This patch is acutally the most important one. Without this patch you get
>>> the following error with softpipe:
>>> libGL: dlopen lib/gallium/swrast_dri.so failed (lib/gallium/swrast_dri.so:
>>> undefined symbol: draw_gs_llvm_destroy_variant)
>>>
>>> So patch 4 is needed and requires patch 2.
>>>
>>> Tobias
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mesa-dev mailing list
>>> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
>>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> mesa-dev mailing list
>> mesa-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
>>
>