From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 25 09:48:32 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30F00106566B for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:48:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from theraven@theravensnest.org) Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F22E18FC08 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:48:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c120.sec.cl.cam.ac.uk (c120.sec.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.18.120]) (authenticated bits=0) by theravensnest.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6P9mS4t034215 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:48:30 GMT (envelope-from theraven@theravensnest.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: David Chisnall In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 10:48:27 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0FD17AD0-AD5B-4B06-A966-849699AA4A1D@theravensnest.org> References: To: Luba Tang X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278) Cc: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MCLinker and llvm-config X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:48:32 -0000 On 25 Jul 2012, at 10:22, Luba Tang wrote: > Let me explain the status of MCLinker. > MCLinker now is one of the standard system linkers in Android system. > https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/compile/mclinker It looks like MCLinker has made a lot of progress since I last checked.=20= > Since there are many practical issues in ELF system (some of them are > undocumented :'( ), I think MCLinker could be said as a linker who is > robust enough to handle with wrapped symbols, segments, .group = section, > exception, DWRAF, and many many ELF unique features. :) Indeed. How do you plan on integrating modern features like LTO into = MCLinker? Can you deal with an atom-based model for efficient code = locality? > In our plan, we will get rid of LLVM in this September. At that time, > MCLinker wil be able to handle archives, and has some basic support = for > link script. What does 'get rid of LLVM' mean in this context? > We have promised BSD systems have higher priority than Linux systems, = and > we will keep our promise. That's also great. The FreeBSD Foundation has some funding set aside = for linker work, but currently nothing concrete to spend it on, so I'd = strongly invite people to submit project proposals in this area. > BTW, I think llvm-config is necessary for every LLVM-based project. If = it > will not be in BSD system, I think we can negotiate an approach to get = rid > of it. > Just like what Android did. I think the rationale for not having it in the base system is sensible: = we don't want things from outside the base system to link against the = LLVM from the base system. When other things are imported, we will most = likely replace their own build system (as we do with LLVM itself) and so = can hard code the location of the LLVM that they link against. David=