All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Grozdan <neutrino8@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux and LLVM
Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 05:13:08 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090509091308.GE15054@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c5bd819b0905081250k2095beb6r1aae22fcd82ac468@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 09:50:04PM +0200, Grozdan wrote:
> 2009/5/8 Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>:
> > Grozdan wrote:
> >>
> > It is highly unlikely we will switch compilers away from gcc -- we have
> > enough problems just supporting multiple gcc versions.
> >
> > That said, you could join the effort to get LLVM to compile under the
> > kernel.  Here is a meta-bug for that:
> > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=4068
> >
> > It is a moot question until LLVM can actually build a bootable kernel :)
> 
> Thanks for the quick answer! I was not aware that currently there's
> lots of work until CLANG can compile a bootable Linux kernel. Thanks
> for the link too. I'll dig through it

Note also that the list of architectures currently supported by Linux:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel_portability_and_supported_architectures

Seems to be a superset of the architectures supported by LLVM, and the
CLANG web page states that it is production quality only on the x86
and x86_64 architectures.  So "switch away from" seems to be a rather
ambitious goal.  

As Jeff has suggested, getting CLANG to at least be able to compile a
single Linux kernel, on one architecture is clearly the first step.

The next step will be to work on fixing regressions on a wide variety
of different kernel configurations such that in people's mind, that
when a kernel bug is submitted, the probability that it is a compiler
bug must be roughly the same as in GCC --- in other words, that for
any give bug report submitted, P(LLVM/CLANG compiler bug) must be less
than P(GCC compiler bug).  At that point, assuming there is a large
enough community of users who prefer to use LLVM/CLANG (presumably
because its code generator is proving itself superior to gcc), it
would be possible to call LLVM/CLANG "supported" under Linux.

I suspect we have quite a ways to go before we get to that point, and
even then there is the issue of the architectures which aren't yet
supported by LLVM.

Regards,

					- Ted

      reply	other threads:[~2009-05-09  9:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-08 19:28 Linux and LLVM Grozdan
2009-05-08 19:41 ` Jeff Garzik
2009-05-08 19:50   ` Grozdan
2009-05-09  9:13     ` Theodore Tso [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090509091308.GE15054@mit.edu \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=jeff@garzik.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neutrino8@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.