Since elftoolchain's cxxfilt is rather far behind on features, and we
ran into several bugs, add an option to use llvm-cxxfilt as an drop-in
replacement.
It supports the same options as elftoolchain cxxfilt, though it doesn't
have support for old ARM (C++ Annotated Reference Manual, not the CPU)
and GNU v2 manglings. But these are irrelevant in 2020.
Note: as we already compile the required libraries as part of libllvm,
this will not add any significant build time either.
PR: 250702
Reviewed by: emaste, yuri
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D27071
MFC after: 2 weeks
llvmorg-10.0.1-rc2-0-g77d76b71d7d.
Also add a few more llvm utilities under WITH_CLANG_EXTRAS:
* llvm-dwp, a utility for merging DWARF 5 Split DWARF .dwo files into
.dwp (DWARF package files)
* llvm-size, a size(1) replacement
* llvm-strings, a strings(1) replacement
MFC after: 3 weeks
* bugpoint.1
* clang.1
* llc.1
* lldb.1
* lli.1
* llvm-ar.1
* llvm-as.1
* llvm-bcanalyzer.1
* llvm-cov.1
* llvm-diff.1
* llvm-dis.1
* llvm-dwarfdump.1
* llvm-extract.1
* llvm-link.1
* llvm-mca.1
* llvm-nm.1
* llvm-pdbutil.1
* llvm-profdata.1
* llvm-symbolizer.1
* llvm-tblgen.1
* opt.1
Add newly generated manpages for:
* llvm-addr2line.1 (this is an alias of llvm-symbolizer)
* llvm-cxxfilt.1
* llvm-objcopy.1
* llvm-ranlib.1 (this is an alias of llvm-ar)
Note that llvm-objdump.1 is an exception, as upstream has both a plain
.1 file, and a .rst variant. These will have to be reconciled upstream
first.
MFC after: 3 days
clang-format is enabled conditional on either WITH_CLANG_EXTRAS or
WITH_CLANG_FORMAT. Some sources in libclang are build conditional on
either rule, and obviously the clang-format binary itself depends on the
rule.
clang-format could still use a manual page.
Reviewed by: emaste
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D25427
Clang from 9.0.0 onwards already has the necessary relocation range
extenders, so this workaround is no longer needed (it produces longer
and slower code). Tested on real hardware, and in cross-compile
environment.
Submitted by: mmel
As described in Warner's email message[1] to the FreeBSD-arch mailing
list we have reached GCC 4.2.1's retirement date. At this time all
supported architectures either use in-tree Clang, or rely on external
toolchain (i.e., a contemporary GCC version from ports).
GCC 4.2.1 was released July 18, 2007 and was imported into FreeBSD later
that year, in r171825. GCC has served us well, but version 4.2.1 is
obsolete and not used by default on any architecture in FreeBSD. It
does not support modern C and does not support arm64 or RISC-V.
Thanks to everyone responsible for maintaining, updating, and testing
GCC in the FreeBSD base system over the years.
So long, and thanks for all the fish.
[1] https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2020-January/019823.html
PR: 228919
Reviewed by: brooks, imp
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D23124
This uses the new layout of the upstream repository, which was recently
migrated to GitHub, and converted into a "monorepo". That is, most of
the earlier separate sub-projects with their own branches and tags were
consolidated into one top-level directory, and are now branched and
tagged together.
Updating the vendor area to match this layout is next.
Traditionally, toolchain components such as cc, as, and ld have been
built as static executables. The WITH_SHARED_TOOLCHAIN option from
src.conf(5) is meant to link these as regular executables, e.g. using
shared libraries.
The build of ld.lld did not yet check this option. Fix the Makefile so
it will do so now.
Reported by: Mike Cui <cuicui@gmail.com>
PR: 241257
MFC after: 3 days
Various bits in usr.bin/clang/* will fail to compile without -mxgot due to
truncated relocations. -mxgot entails a speed penalty, but I suspect we
don't care as much about compiler performance in 32-bit mips land.
Reviewed by: arichardson
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D21698
To facilitate experimentation with LTO we require an ar that supports
LLVM IR, and to a lesser degree also an nm. As a first step always
install llvm-ar and llvm-nm.
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
ASAN reports become a lot more useful with llvm-symbolizer in $PATH, and the
build is not much more time-consuming. The added benefit is that the
resulting reports will actually include symbol information; without, thread
trace information includes a bunch of addresses that immediately resolve to
an inline function in
^/contrib/compiler-rt/lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_common.h and take a
little more effort to examine.
Reviewed by: emaste
MFC after: 1 week
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D20484
Building binaries as PIE allows the executable itself to be loaded at a
random address when ASLR is enabled (not just its shared libraries).
With this change PIE objects have a .pieo extension and INTERNALLIB
libraries libXXX_pie.a.
MK_PIE is disabled for some kerberos5 tools, Clang, and Subversion, as
they explicitly reference .a libraries in their Makefiles. These can
be addressed on an individual basis later. MK_PIE is also disabled for
rtld-elf because it is already position-independent using bespoke
Makefile rules.
Currently only dynamically linked binaries will be built as PIE.
Discussed with: dim
Reviewed by: kib
MFC after: 1 month
Relnotes: Yes
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18423
Some options come from static constructors in LLVM libraries and are
automatically added to llvm's usage output. They're not really supposed
to be llvm-objdump options.
Reported by: Fangrui Song in LLVM review D54864
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
Some options appear in llvm-objdump's usage information as a side effect
of its option parsing implementation and are not actually llvm-objdump
options. Reported in LLVM review https://reviews.llvm.org/D54864.
Reported by: Fangrui Song
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
Based on llvm-objdump's online documentation and usage information.
This serves as a starting point; additional detail and cleanup still
required.
Also being submitted upstream in LLVM review D54864. I expect to use
this bespoke copy while we have LLVM 6.0 or 7.0 in FreeBSD; when we
update to LLVM 8.0 it should be upstream and we will switch to it.
PR: 233437
Reviewed by: bcr (man formatting)
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18309
llvm-profdata is used with llvm-cov for code coverage (although llvm-cov
can also operate independently in a gcov-compatible mode).
Although llvm-profdata can be used independently of llvm-cov it makes
sense to group these under one option.
Also handle these in OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc while here.
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
llvm-cov provides a gcov-compatible interface when invoked as gcov.
Reviewed by: dim, markj
MFC after: 1 month
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D17923
The current kernel ifunc implementation creates a PLT entry for each
ifunc definition. ifunc calls therefore consist of a call to the
PLT entry followed by an indirect jump. The jump target is written
during boot when the kernel linker resolves R_[*]_IRELATIVE relocations.
This implementation is defined by requirements for userland code, where
text relocations are avoided. This requirement is not present for the
kernel, so the implementation has avoidable overhead (namely, an extra
indirect jump per call).
Address this for now by adding a special option to the static linker
to inhibit PLT creation for ifuncs. Instead, relocations to ifunc call
sites are passed through to the output file, so the kernel linker can
enumerate such call sites and apply PC-relative relocations directly
to the text section. Thus the overhead of an ifunc call becomes exactly
the same as that of an ordinary function call. This option is only for
use by the kernel and will not work for regular programs.
The final form of this optimization is up for debate; for now, this
change is simple and static enough to be acceptable as an interim
solution.
Reviewed by: emaste
Discussed with: arichardson, dim
MFC after: 1 month
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D16748
