All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] configure: workaround for Clang 3.5.0
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 22:20:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56328DB2.5010205@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <563281A8.60604@redhat.com>

Aargh, clicked "Reply" instead of "Reply All". Resending.

On 10/29/15 21:29, John Snow wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/29/2015 04:22 PM, John Snow wrote:
>> Clang++ 3.5 on Fedora 22 appears to have difficulty tolerating
>> D_FORTIFY_SOURCE for certain glibc headers, such as stdio.
>>
>> This interferes, currently, with any arm target build.
>>
>> Work around this by disabling FORTIFY_SOURCE for clang builds
>> if a problem is observed.
>>
>> Newer versions of clang such as 3.5.2 (As seen in debian-testing)
>> or 3.7.0 (As seen in Fedora 23 Beta) are unaffected and will not
>> trigger this workaround.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
>> ---
> 
> As a meta-cover-letter, this fix is a little weird in that it will
> disable FORTIFY_SOURCE (silently!) for non-debug builds. Not great.
> 
> (Maybe I could have it fail and print a warning encouraging users to
> either use --enable-debug or --disable-fortify-source?)
> 
> Still, It'd be nice to have Clang builds working out of the box for ARM
> builds. It just so happens that ARM is the only target that happens to
> trip this specific unfortunate chain of events.
> 
> Is it sane to check for clang-and-arm-targets only? Maybe it's a moot
> point -- newer (and older, I believe) versions of Clang won't trigger
> this at all.
> 
> Anyway, see these links (Dredged up by Laszlo Ersek, thanks!)

Thanks for the credit.

I didn't notice this patch on the list (and I've been CC'd just now), so
I'm unsure if I'm supposed to (try to) review it. If so, then:

> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=7219
> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16821
> https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=23277#c2
> 
> Here's a good takeaway quote:
> 
> 'Also, _FORTIFY_SOURCE + glibc + clang is not supported and does not
> work (for instance, it relies on __builtin_va_pack_len and friends,
> which we have no intention of supporting), so glibc compatibility is
> unlikely to be a strong motivator for a change here.'

this quote would be compelling enough for me to disable _FORTIFY_SOURCE
when clang is seen, no questions asked. The above is a public no-support
statement from an apparently core clang developer, so "it happens to
build without errors with version X.Y.Z." just don't cut it. A positive
claim (bugzilla comment, release note, etc) would be necessary.

... As far as I'm concerned, of course. :)

Cheers
Laszlo


> 
> So long story short, we have a weird hacky workaround where we disable
> FORTIFY_SOURCE for compilers that don't appear to be able to support it.
> 
> --js
> 
>>  configure | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/configure b/configure
>> index 7a1d08d..7abfcc3 100755
>> --- a/configure
>> +++ b/configure
>> @@ -107,6 +107,11 @@ compile_object() {
>>    do_cc $QEMU_CFLAGS $local_cflags -c -o $TMPO $TMPC
>>  }
>>  
>> +compile_cxx_object() {
>> +  local_cflags="$1"
>> +  do_cxx $QEMU_CXXFLAGS $local_cflags -c -o $TMPO $TMPC
>> +}
>> +
>>  compile_prog() {
>>    local_cflags="$1"
>>    local_ldflags="$2"
>> @@ -4436,13 +4441,31 @@ if ! compile_object "-Werror"; then
>>  fi
>>  
>>  ##########################################
>> +# Test that we can use FORTIFY_SOURCE,
>> +# which might break Clang.
>> +
>> +if test "$debug" = "no"; then
>> +  cat > $TMPC << EOF
>> +#include <cstdio>
>> +int main(int argc, char*argv[]) {
>> +  fprintf(stdout, "Hello World\n");
>> +  return 0;
>> +}
>> +EOF
>> +
>> +  if ! compile_cxx_object "-O2 -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2"; then
>> +      fortify_source="no";
>> +  fi
>> +fi
>> +
>> +##########################################
>>  # End of CC checks
>>  # After here, no more $cc or $ld runs
>>  
>>  if test "$gcov" = "yes" ; then
>>    CFLAGS="-fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage -g $CFLAGS"
>>    LDFLAGS="-fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage $LDFLAGS"
>> -elif test "$debug" = "no" ; then
>> +elif test "$debug" = "no" && test "$fortify_source" != "no" ; then
>>    CFLAGS="-O2 -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 $CFLAGS"
>>  fi
>>  
>>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-10-29 21:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-10-29 20:22 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] configure: workaround for Clang 3.5.0 John Snow
2015-10-29 20:29 ` John Snow
2015-10-29 21:20   ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2015-10-29 21:25     ` Peter Maydell
2015-10-29 21:28       ` John Snow

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=56328DB2.5010205@redhat.com \
    --to=lersek@redhat.com \
    --cc=jsnow@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /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.