This patch fixes a build issue on LoongArch when Rust is enabled and compiled with GCC by explicitly setting the bindgen target and skipping C flags that Clang doesn't support.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: WANG Rui wangrui@loongson.cn --- rust/Makefile | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/rust/Makefile b/rust/Makefile index ea3849eb78f6..2c57c624fe7d 100644 --- a/rust/Makefile +++ b/rust/Makefile @@ -232,7 +232,8 @@ bindgen_skip_c_flags := -mno-fp-ret-in-387 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=% \ -mfunction-return=thunk-extern -mrecord-mcount -mabi=lp64 \ -mindirect-branch-cs-prefix -mstack-protector-guard% -mtraceback=no \ -mno-pointers-to-nested-functions -mno-string \ - -mno-strict-align -mstrict-align \ + -mno-strict-align -mstrict-align -mdirect-extern-access \ + -mexplicit-relocs -mno-check-zero-division \ -fconserve-stack -falign-jumps=% -falign-loops=% \ -femit-struct-debug-baseonly -fno-ipa-cp-clone -fno-ipa-sra \ -fno-partial-inlining -fplugin-arg-arm_ssp_per_task_plugin-% \ @@ -246,6 +247,7 @@ bindgen_skip_c_flags := -mno-fp-ret-in-387 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=% \ # Derived from `scripts/Makefile.clang`. BINDGEN_TARGET_x86 := x86_64-linux-gnu BINDGEN_TARGET_arm64 := aarch64-linux-gnu +BINDGEN_TARGET_loongarch := loongarch64-linux-gnusf BINDGEN_TARGET := $(BINDGEN_TARGET_$(SRCARCH))
# All warnings are inhibited since GCC builds are very experimental,
On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 15:35 +0800, WANG Rui wrote:
This patch fixes a build issue on LoongArch when Rust is enabled and compiled with GCC by explicitly setting the bindgen target and skipping C flags that Clang doesn't support.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: WANG Rui wangrui@loongson.cn
rust/Makefile | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/rust/Makefile b/rust/Makefile index ea3849eb78f6..2c57c624fe7d 100644 --- a/rust/Makefile +++ b/rust/Makefile @@ -232,7 +232,8 @@ bindgen_skip_c_flags := -mno-fp-ret-in-387 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=% \ -mfunction-return=thunk-extern -mrecord-mcount -mabi=lp64 \ -mindirect-branch-cs-prefix -mstack-protector-guard% -mtraceback=no \ -mno-pointers-to-nested-functions -mno-string \
- -mno-strict-align -mstrict-align \
- -mno-strict-align -mstrict-align -mdirect-extern-access \
- -mexplicit-relocs -mno-check-zero-division \
Hmm I'm wondering if we can just drop -mno-check-zero-division from cflags-y: for all GCC releases it's the default at either -O2 or -Os, and AFAIK we don't support other optimization levels.
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 3:49 PM Xi Ruoyao xry111@xry111.site wrote:
On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 15:35 +0800, WANG Rui wrote:
This patch fixes a build issue on LoongArch when Rust is enabled and compiled with GCC by explicitly setting the bindgen target and skipping C flags that Clang doesn't support.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: WANG Rui wangrui@loongson.cn
rust/Makefile | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/rust/Makefile b/rust/Makefile index ea3849eb78f6..2c57c624fe7d 100644 --- a/rust/Makefile +++ b/rust/Makefile @@ -232,7 +232,8 @@ bindgen_skip_c_flags := -mno-fp-ret-in-387 -mpreferred-stack-boundary=% \ -mfunction-return=thunk-extern -mrecord-mcount -mabi=lp64 \ -mindirect-branch-cs-prefix -mstack-protector-guard% -mtraceback=no \ -mno-pointers-to-nested-functions -mno-string \
-mno-strict-align -mstrict-align \
-mno-strict-align -mstrict-align -mdirect-extern-access \-mexplicit-relocs -mno-check-zero-division \Hmm I'm wondering if we can just drop -mno-check-zero-division from cflags-y: for all GCC releases it's the default at either -O2 or -Os, and AFAIK we don't support other optimization levels.
Don't rely on default behavior, things may change in future. Acked-by: Huacai Chen chenhuacai@loongson.cn
-- Xi Ruoyao xry111@xry111.site School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 10:12 AM Huacai Chen chenhuacai@kernel.org wrote:
Don't rely on default behavior, things may change in future. Acked-by: Huacai Chen chenhuacai@loongson.cn
I was pinged about this one -- are you picking this one through your tree?
I didn't test it, but the change seems safe to me for other architectures that we have at the moment, since they don't seem to set any of those three from a quick look, so:
Acked-by: Miguel Ojeda ojeda@kernel.org
In any case, the usual question for these "skipped flags" is whether they could affect the output of `bindgen`, i.e. could they modify layouts somehow?
Also, it would be nice to mention a bit more what was the build error and the GCC version in the commit message.
Finally, regarding the Cc: stable, I guess that means 6.12+ since it is the first LTS with loongarch64, right?
Thanks!
Cheers, Miguel
On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 12:15 AM Miguel Ojeda miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the review and feedback!
In any case, the usual question for these "skipped flags" is whether they could affect the output of `bindgen`, i.e. could they modify layouts somehow?
These "skipped flags" won't affect the output of `bindgen`.
Also, it would be nice to mention a bit more what was the build error and the GCC version in the commit message.
To make it easier for the maintainer to include more details in the commit message, I've attached the original build error message below.
BINDGEN rust/bindings/bindings_generated.rs error: unknown argument: '-mexplicit-relocs' error: unknown argument: '-mdirect-extern-access' error: unsupported argument 'normal' to option '-mcmodel=' for target 'unknown' error: unknown target triple 'unknown' panicked at /home/hev/.cargo/registry/src/index.crates.io-1949cf8c6b5b557f/bindgen-0.71.1/ir/context.rs:564:15: libclang error; possible causes include: - Invalid flag syntax - Unrecognized flags - Invalid flag arguments - File I/O errors - Host vs. target architecture mismatch If you encounter an error missing from this list, please file an issue or a PR!
gcc version 14.2.0 (crosstool-NG 1.27.0)
Finally, regarding the Cc: stable, I guess that means 6.12+ since it is the first LTS with loongarch64, right?
Also, the `Cc: stable` is indeed targeting 6.12+, as it's the first LTS with LoongArch64.
Thanks again!
Cheers, -Rui
Hi, Miguel,
On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 12:15 AM Miguel Ojeda miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 10:12 AM Huacai Chen chenhuacai@kernel.org wrote:
Don't rely on default behavior, things may change in future. Acked-by: Huacai Chen chenhuacai@loongson.cn
I was pinged about this one -- are you picking this one through your tree?
OK, I wll pick it to the loongarch tree, thanks.
Huacai
I didn't test it, but the change seems safe to me for other architectures that we have at the moment, since they don't seem to set any of those three from a quick look, so:
Acked-by: Miguel Ojeda ojeda@kernel.org
In any case, the usual question for these "skipped flags" is whether they could affect the output of `bindgen`, i.e. could they modify layouts somehow?
Also, it would be nice to mention a bit more what was the build error and the GCC version in the commit message.
Finally, regarding the Cc: stable, I guess that means 6.12+ since it is the first LTS with loongarch64, right?
Thanks!
Cheers, Miguel
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Huacai Chen -
Miguel Ojeda -
WANG Rui -
Xi Ruoyao