[Mesa-stable] mesa-10.6: LLVM/Clang v3.7 fixes (gallivm)

[Sedat Dilek]

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14 September 2015 at 10:36, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 4 September 2015 at 19:57, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I compiled a toolchain based on LLVM/Clang v3.7.0 today and tested it
>>>> with an updated version of my Linux Graphics driver stack (see
>>>> attached logs).
>>>>
>>>> Here on Ubuntu/precise AMD64 I required two patches (see attached 0001
>>>> and 0002) post-mesa-10.6.5+ to build it successfully.
>>>> Feel free to cherry-pick them to 10.6 Git branch.
>>>>
>>> Ftr the attached patches are master commits
>>> 147ffd48166d851341cadd12de98895f32ec25a2 gallivm: Do not use
>>> NoFramePointerElim with LLVM 3.7.
>>> 09d6243aed016eed4518435c9885275dbb6d2aa9 gallivm: Workaround LLVM PR23628.
>>>
>>> Both of which seems like trivial and non-evasive changes imho, so
>>> unless there are any objections I'll scoop them.
>>> Iirc on the radeon side, more work is needed. So picking these won't
>>> imply that building mesa 10.6.x with llvm 3.7 is officially supported
>>> and/or tested. But a bit of "try it, if you're crazy enough" :-)
>>>
>>> Thanks Sedat !
>>>
>>
>> Yes, both patches where cherry-picked from Git master for mesa-10.6.
>>
>> What does your statement means in the end...
>> Will those 2 patches go into mesa-10.6 (be included in mesa v10.6.8)?
>>
> It means two things
>  - they will (are) picked, considering the lack of objections.
>  - building with/against llvm 3.7 is entirely at your own risk and not
> officially supported :-)
>
> I can see how my earlier reply was a bit confusing, hopefully thing
> one is a tad clearer.
>

Thanks, both patches landed in mesa v10.6.8.

- Sedat -