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
prev parent 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox