Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2012 18:01:51 +0100 From: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> To: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: clang and static linking? Message-ID: <509D36FF.3000409@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20121109164541.GA34499@freebsd.org> References: <20121108231349.GA79485@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20121108234932.GA56820@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20121109120012.GB73505@kib.kiev.ua> <20121109164304.GA61011@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20121109164541.GA34499@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 2012-11-09 17:45, Roman Divacky wrote: > On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 08:43:04AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote: ... ... >> I'll try this shortly. Does this mean that we need to build >> all *.a libraries where a weak reference may occur with this >> switch? > > No, this has nothing to do with llvm integrated asm. > > So far it looks like gcc always inline "isnan" even at O0 while > clang does not. We are trying to figure out the solution. No, it is not related to the optimization level. It looks like isnan() is a builtin for gcc, but not for clang. The isnan() macro expands to a isnan() call for a few of libm's objects: s_fdim.o s_csqrt.o e_scalb.o > Maybe use __builtin_isnan instead of isnan in the isnan macro expansion? Either that, or if people prefer to use libc's isnan() implementation, make sure gcc also calls it instead.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?509D36FF.3000409>