On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 03:25:51PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> Based on a vote at the LLVM BoF at Plumbers 2020, we decided to start
> small, supporting just one formal upstream release of LLVM for now.
>
> We can probably widen the support window of supported versions over
> time. Also, note that LLVM's release process is different than GCC's.
> GCC tends to have 1 major release per year while releasing minor updates
> to the past 3 major versions. LLVM tends to support one major release
> and one minor release every six months.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <[email protected]>
> ---
> Note to reviewers: working remote, I'm having trouble testing/verifying
> that I have the RST links wired up correctly; I would appreciate it if
> someone is able to `make htmldocs` and check
> Documentation/output/process/changes.html properly links to
> Documentation/output/kbuild/llvm.html.
I ran 'make O=out htmldocs' and can confirm that the link works properly
in process/changes.html, pointing to kbuild/llvm.html.
> Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst | 2 ++
> Documentation/process/changes.rst | 10 ++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst b/Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst
> index 2aac50b97921..70ec6e9a183b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst
> @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
> +.. _kbuild_llvm:
> +
> ==============================
> Building Linux with Clang/LLVM
> ==============================
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/changes.rst b/Documentation/process/changes.rst
> index ee741763a3fc..6c580ef9f2a3 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/changes.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/changes.rst
> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ you probably needn't concern yourself with pcmciautils.
> Program Minimal version Command to check the version
> ====================== =============== ========================================
> GNU C 4.9 gcc --version
> +Clang/LLVM (optional) 10.0.1 clang --version
Maybe it is worth making the "(optional)" a footnote like Sphinx? Seems
to just kind of stick out to me but I do not have a strong opinion
unless others do.
> GNU make 3.81 make --version
> binutils 2.23 ld -v
> flex 2.5.35 flex --version
> @@ -68,6 +69,15 @@ GCC
> The gcc version requirements may vary depending on the type of CPU in your
> computer.
>
> +Clang/LLVM (optional)
> +---------------------
> +
> +The latest formal release of clang and LLVM utils (according to
> +`releases.llvm.org <https://releases.llvm.org>`_) are supported for building
> +kernels. Older releases aren't gauranteed to work, and we may drop workarounds
> +from the kernel that were used to support older versions. Please see additional
> +docs on :ref:`Building Linux with Clang/LLVM <kbuild_llvm>`.
> +
Do we maybe want to add a section for LLVM/clang in the "Getting updated
software" section? Maybe just a link to the existing section that we
have in kbuild/llvm.rst?
> Make
> ----
>
> --
> 2.28.0.297.g1956fa8f8d-goog
>
Regardless of the nits above:
Reviewed-and-tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 15:51:31 -0700
Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]> wrote:
> > +Clang/LLVM (optional) 10.0.1 clang --version
>
> Maybe it is worth making the "(optional)" a footnote like Sphinx? Seems
> to just kind of stick out to me but I do not have a strong opinion
> unless others do.
Let's not do that; the table needs to be properly readable in plain-text
format. Adding that sort of markup will just serve to obfuscate things.
Thanks,
jon
On 8/25/20 17:51, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 03:25:51PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>> Based on a vote at the LLVM BoF at Plumbers 2020, we decided to start
>> small, supporting just one formal upstream release of LLVM for now.
>>
>> We can probably widen the support window of supported versions over
>> time. Also, note that LLVM's release process is different than GCC's.
>> GCC tends to have 1 major release per year while releasing minor updates
>> to the past 3 major versions. LLVM tends to support one major release
>> and one minor release every six months.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> Note to reviewers: working remote, I'm having trouble testing/verifying
>> that I have the RST links wired up correctly; I would appreciate it if
>> someone is able to `make htmldocs` and check
>> Documentation/output/process/changes.html properly links to
>> Documentation/output/kbuild/llvm.html.
>
> I ran 'make O=out htmldocs' and can confirm that the link works properly
> in process/changes.html, pointing to kbuild/llvm.html.
>
The same here.
Tested-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
Thanks
--
Gustavo
>> Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst | 2 ++
>> Documentation/process/changes.rst | 10 ++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst b/Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst
>> index 2aac50b97921..70ec6e9a183b 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst
>> @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
>> +.. _kbuild_llvm:
>> +
>> ==============================
>> Building Linux with Clang/LLVM
>> ==============================
>> diff --git a/Documentation/process/changes.rst b/Documentation/process/changes.rst
>> index ee741763a3fc..6c580ef9f2a3 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/process/changes.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/process/changes.rst
>> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ you probably needn't concern yourself with pcmciautils.
>> Program Minimal version Command to check the version
>> ====================== =============== ========================================
>> GNU C 4.9 gcc --version
>> +Clang/LLVM (optional) 10.0.1 clang --version
>
> Maybe it is worth making the "(optional)" a footnote like Sphinx? Seems
> to just kind of stick out to me but I do not have a strong opinion
> unless others do.
>
>> GNU make 3.81 make --version
>> binutils 2.23 ld -v
>> flex 2.5.35 flex --version
>> @@ -68,6 +69,15 @@ GCC
>> The gcc version requirements may vary depending on the type of CPU in your
>> computer.
>>
>> +Clang/LLVM (optional)
>> +---------------------
>> +
>> +The latest formal release of clang and LLVM utils (according to
>> +`releases.llvm.org <https://releases.llvm.org>`_) are supported for building
>> +kernels. Older releases aren't gauranteed to work, and we may drop workarounds
>> +from the kernel that were used to support older versions. Please see additional
>> +docs on :ref:`Building Linux with Clang/LLVM <kbuild_llvm>`.
>> +
>
> Do we maybe want to add a section for LLVM/clang in the "Getting updated
> software" section? Maybe just a link to the existing section that we
> have in kbuild/llvm.rst?
>
>> Make
>> ----
>>
>> --
>> 2.28.0.297.g1956fa8f8d-goog
>>
>
> Regardless of the nits above:
>
> Reviewed-and-tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]>
>