Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200403051709.22407-1-masahiroy@kernel.org> <CAKwvOdnaZ6qDVxaPY-GEH8pdUkzH6eqm16ok9_wzRSVRG-1kiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK7LNAQybfcYiosNU+ybd-Q7-Y2dbLqBVN2XA00wCRnFAoqdew@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200405235507.psjjhqa3cxw57xra@google.com> <CAK7LNAS_SQg2nhJ8HKBTq3+dziGpaJZ87fOBRS-ZMdUpKGhX9Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAK7LNAS_SQg2nhJ8HKBTq3+dziGpaJZ87fOBRS-ZMdUpKGhX9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: sedat.dilek@gmail.com
From:   Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Apr 2020 11:12:39 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+icZUU5YmFJispXy8Ax7gzxv__LfFMwUX-cGO_kaNXv_RHO7w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: support 'LLVM' to switch the default tools to Clang/LLVM
To:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Cc:     Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Matthias_M=C3=A4nnich?= <maennich@google.com>,
        Sandeep Patil <sspatil@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:34 AM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:55 AM 'Fangrui Song' via Clang Built Linux
> <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-04-06, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > >On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 3:24 AM Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 10:17 PM Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > As Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst implies, building the kernel with a
> > >> > full set of LLVM tools gets very verbose and unwieldy.
> > >> >
> > >> > Provide a single switch 'LLVM' to use Clang and LLVM tools instead of
> > >> > GCC and Binutils. You can pass LLVM=1 from the command line or as an
> > >> > environment variable. Then, Kbuild will use LLVM toolchains in your
> > >> > PATH environment.
> > >> >
> > >> > Please note LLVM=1 does not turn on the LLVM integrated assembler.
> > >> > You need to explicitly pass AS=clang to use it. When the upstream
> > >> > kernel is ready for the integrated assembler, I think we can make
> > >> > it default.
> > >>
> > >> Having this behavior change over time may be surprising.  I'd rather
> > >> that if you want to not use the integrated assembler, you explicitly
> > >> negate it, or just don't use the LLVM=1 syntax, ie. `make CC=clang
> > >> LD=ld.lld ...`.
> > >>
> > >> We could modify how `-no-integrated-as` is chosen when LLVM=1.
> > >>
> > >> make LLVM=1 LLVMIA=0 ... # add `-no-integrated-as`
> > >> # what the flag is doesn't really matter to me, something shorter might be nice.
> > >> make LLVM=1 # use all LLVM tools
> > >>
> > >> Since we got rid of $(AS), it would be appropriate to remove/change it
> > >> there, since no one really relies on AS=clang right now. (We do have 1
> > >> of our 60+ CI targets using it, but we can also change that trivially.
> > >> So I think we have a lot of freedom to change how `-no-integrated-as`
> > >> is set.
> > >>
> > >> This could even be independent of this patch.
> > >
> > >
> > >I also thought a boolean flag is preferred.
> > >
> > >AS=clang will not live long anyway, and
> > >I hesitated to break the compatibility
> > >for the short-term workaround.
> > >
> > >But, if this is not a big deal, I can
> > >replace AS=clang with LLVMIA=1.
> >
> > My mere complaint is that it may be difficult to infer the intention (integrated
> > assembler) from the abbreviation "IA" in "LLVMIA" :/
> >
> > Something with "AS" in the name may be easier for a user to understand,
> > e.g. CLANG_AS or LLVM_AS.
>
>
>
>
> I see 'llvm-as' in my PATH,
> but it is a different kind of tool, right?
> (converter from LLVM assembler *.ll to LLVM bit code *.bc)
>
> So, I thought "LLVM_AS" might be confusing.
>

Indeed LLVM_AS is confusing as llvm-as is different to Clang's
integrated assembler.
So CLANG_AS might be a better choice.

- sed@ -