From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: samitolvanen@google.com (Sami Tolvanen) Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 08:51:43 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 13/15] arm64: fix mrs_s/msr_s macros for clang LTO In-Reply-To: References: <20171103171203.107569-1-samitolvanen@google.com> <20171103171203.107569-18-samitolvanen@google.com> <20171108092555.ta4mkqolunyw6mdr@yury-thinkpad> <20171109000222.GC8522@tassilo.jf.intel.com> Message-ID: <20171109165143.GD10540@samitolvanen.mtv.corp.google.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 07:48:06AM +0300, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > Regarding CONFIG_* options, I would expect most of the configuration > changes to be equally valid for both GCC's and Clang's LTO support. > Sami, I don't think it's fair to ask you to support both Clang and GCC in > your patchset, but, where changes are obviously toolchain-agnostic, could > you use CONFIG_LTO? And use CONFIG_LTO_CLANG for Clang-specific parts? Sure, using CONFIG_LTO for common code and CONFIG_LTO_CLANG for clang- specific parts sounds good. Sami