From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra) Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:59:22 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 18/18] arm64: select ARCH_SUPPORTS_LTO_CLANG In-Reply-To: References: <20171115213428.22559-1-samitolvanen@google.com> <20171115213428.22559-19-samitolvanen@google.com> <20171116115810.GH9361@arm.com> <20171116161731.GA94341@samitolvanen.mtv.corp.google.com> <20171116163054.kcsdsomr7u2mqql2@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> Message-ID: <20171116165922.llrojrvomuihabrt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 08:50:41AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Ideally we'd get the toolchain people to commit to supporting the kernel > > memory model along side the C11 one. That would help a ton. > > Does anyone from the kernel side participate in the C standardization process? Yes, Paul McKenney and Will Deacon. Doesn't mean these two can still be reconciled though. From what I understand C11 (and onwards) are incompatible with the kernel model on a number of subtle points. Not to mention that there's people in the C11 process that strongly argue for stuff that would break every single multi-threaded program written since the 70s, which would include pretty much all OS kernels.