[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/4] llvm: enable bpf

[Valentin Korenblit <valentinkorenblit@gmail.com>]

Fabrice, Thomas,

> Dear Thomas,
> Le sam. 3 nov. 2018 ? 14:14, Thomas Petazzoni
> <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> a ?crit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Sat,  3 Nov 2018 13:27:56 +0100, Fabrice Fontaine wrote:
>>> BPF (in-kernel bytecode machine) is needed by libv4l
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>   package/llvm/llvm.mk | 3 +++
>>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/package/llvm/llvm.mk b/package/llvm/llvm.mk
>>> index 1f9bd447f5..dae5d3f16d 100644
>>> --- a/package/llvm/llvm.mk
>>> +++ b/package/llvm/llvm.mk
>>> @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_LLVM_AMDGPU),y)
>>>   LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD += AMDGPU
>>>   endif
>>>
>>> +# Build BPF (in-kernel bytecode machine)
>>> +LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD += BPF
>> Perhaps we should make this optional ? Or maybe the build time
>> difference is not that significant ?
> llvm and clang are already taking a long time to build on my "old"
> machine, I didn't notice a significant difference with or without BPF
> but I didn't measure it.

I think we should add a new option just like we did with AMDGPU backend
as we said we were only going to build backend for target archictecture
by default.

>> Best regards,
>>
>> Thomas
>> --
>> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
>> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
>> https://bootlin.com
> Best Regards,
>
> Fabrice

Best regards,

Valentin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20181103/bf3d35b5/attachment.html>