Re: [PATCH] compiler-gcc: get back Clang build

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Tue, 2018-08-21 at 09:32 -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 5:38 AM Dominique Martinet
> <asmadeus@codewreck.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Nick Desaulniers Aug. 21, 2018, 8:09 a.m. UTC:
> > > Thanks for noticing, and sending this patch.  I'm happy to see others
> > > testing with Clang.  I noticed this too near the end of the day
> > > https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/27.
> > 
> > FWIW libbcc so many BPF users also use clang, so this has more impact
> > than just testing to build linux with clang (not that this would be any
> > reason to delay fixing either way)
> > 
> > I would tend to agree havin a compiler-common + make clang/intel not
> > include compiler-gcc would probably be best in the long run but we might
> > want a quick fix for 4.19 meanwhile..
> 
> That's fair. SOP here is quick (full) revert, then come up with a
> better fix.  And I do prefer Masahiro's partial revert to a full
> revert of Joe's patch.  That will give us more time to develop the
> proper fix rather than rush.  I'll try to see how we can more properly
> split the compiler specific headers.
> 
> Tested with gcc-7 and clang-8.

clang-8? Isn't the latest officlal clang 6.0.1 ?

http://releases.llvm.org/

vs

https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ReleaseNotes.html

So if something other than 6.0.x is required,
then some additional check should probably be
added to compiler-clang.h as well.