From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 11 14:08:27 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDEEB106566C; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:08:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (lor.one-eyed-alien.net [69.66.77.232]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48CF48FC0A; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:08:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lor.one-eyed-alien.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8BE8PMu073737; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:08:25 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from brooks@lor.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: (from brooks@localhost) by lor.one-eyed-alien.net (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q8BE8P1F073736; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:08:25 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from brooks) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:08:25 -0500 From: Brooks Davis To: Konstantin Belousov Message-ID: <20120911140825.GA73518@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <20120910211207.GC64920@lor.one-eyed-alien.net> <20120911104518.GF37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120911104518.GF37286@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: toolchain@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:08:27 -0000 --FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 01:45:18PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:12:07PM -0500, Brooks Davis wrote: > > For the past several years we've been working towards migrating from > > GCC to Clang/LLVM as our default compiler. We intend to ship FreeBSD > > 10.0 with Clang as the default compiler on i386 and amd64 platforms. To > > this end, we will make WITH_CLANG_IS_CC the default on i386 and amd64 > > platforms on November 4th. > >=20 > > What does the mean to you? > >=20 > > * When you build world after the default is changed /usr/bin/cc, cpp, = and > > c++ will be links to clang. > >=20 > > * This means the initial phase of buildworld and "old style" kernel > > compilation will use clang instead of gcc. This is known to work. > >=20 > > * It also means that ports will build with clang by default. A major > > of ports work, but a significant number are broken or blocked by > > broken ports. For more information see: > > http://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsAndClang > >=20 > > What issues remain? > >=20 > > * The gcc->clang transition currently requires setting CC, CXX, and CPP > > in addition to WITH_CLANG_IS_CC. I will post a patch to toolchain@ > > to address this shortly. > >=20 > > * Ports compiler selection infrastructure is still under development. > >=20 > > * Some ports could build with clang with appropriate tweaks. > >=20 > > What can you do to help? > >=20 > > * Switch (some of) your systems. Early adoption can help us find bugs. > >=20 > > * Fix ports to build with clang. If you don't have a clang system, you > > can use the CLANG/amd64 or CLANG/i386 build environments on > > redports.org. > >=20 > > tl;dr: Clang will become the default compiler for x86 architectures on = 2012-11-04 >=20 > There was a chorus of voices talking about ports already. My POV > is that suggesting to 'fix remaining ports to work with clang' is > just a nonsense. You are proposing to fork the development of all the > programs which do not compile with clang. Often, upstream developers > do not care about clang at all since it not being default compiler in > Debian/Fedora/Whatever Linux. The project simply do not have resources > to maintain the fork of 20K programs. I may have phrased the above poorly, but in most cases I'd be happy with using USE_GCC as a solution, but to the extent that port maintainers can fix their ports to build with clang, that's a good thing. Having a deadline will help focus efforts towards finding the right fix for the most important ports in a timely manner. If we near the deadline and find that we need a few more weeks, nothing prevents us from slipping the date a bit. > Another issue with the switch, which seems to be not only not addressed, > but even not talked about, is the performance impact of the change. I > do not remember any measurements, whatever silly they could be, of the > performance change by the compiler switch. We often have serious and > argumented push-back for kernel changes that give as low as 2-3% of > the speed hit. What are the numbers for clang change, any numbers ? Florian Smeets (flo) did one round of benchmarks back in June with sysbench/mysql. There is a small but measurable slowdown both with world compiled with clang and with mysql compiled with clang. You can see the results on the last page of this document: http://people.freebsd.org/~flo/perf.pdf The total impacts are on the order of 1-2%. That's more than I'd like and I expect some pushback, but I feel it is in the range of acceptable code debt to take on to accomplish a multi-year project goal. -- Brooks --FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFQT0XYXY6L6fI4GtQRAgvtAKDPrwu05OQOb/j6EvsOeKsEbvHIdQCeIE7J wXb5+Tm66WW7tve8Jtw1jPs= =oZ8q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FL5UXtIhxfXey3p5--