From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Deegan Subject: Re: Clang/LLVM version requirements Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 11:31:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20120912103145.GB97347@ocelot.phlegethon.org> References: <20120907085036.GA71093@ocelot.phlegethon.org> <20120907085036.GA71093@ocelot.phlegethon.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jeffrey Karrels Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org At 08:58 -0700 on 07 Sep (1347008330), Jeffrey Karrels wrote: > > Looks like the clang build has bitrotted a little - sorry. It's too > > late to fix this for 4.2 now but we can sort it out after we branch > > (i.e. next week) and backport any build fixes for 4.2.1. > > > > No worries. I can try and help out on this. Do you think it is > worthwhile to start a Wiki page for this type of work. Yes, I think so. Lars Kurth can sort you out with whatever accounts/permissions you need. > I was working with cppcheck, sparse, clang on/for xen... That all sounds great. I'm in favour of any more analysis we can get, at least if it doesn't need intrusive annotations. At 11:43 -0700 on 11 Sep (1347363829), Jeffrey Karrels wrote: > Just to keep the knowledge in the collective... I updated my clang and > llvm to the latest trunk: > > [builder@xenbuild1 xen-unstable]$ /usr/local/bin/clang -v > clang version 3.2 (trunk 163631) > Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu > Thread model: posix > > After that I applied the patch that Tim previously posted and tried > another make. The xen build succeeded. Glad to hear it. I'll sort out a better version of that patch (i.e. that doesn't just remove the code but reimplements it in a clang-friendly way) tomorrow. Tim.