From: "Jose E. Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>
To: Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [COMMITTED] bpf: define __bpf__ as well as __BPF__ as a target macro
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 18:45:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bks1istm.fsf@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFP8O3KpuAgMjsmfh_BxOKhjvNjTtkQxn1NUEOU3SZPY20H7Pw@mail.gmail.com> (Fangrui Song's message of "Mon, 29 Aug 2022 17:31:00 -0700")
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 1:16 PM Jose E. Marchesi via Gcc-patches
> <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> LLVM defines both __bpf__ and __BPF_ as target macros.
>> GCC was defining only __BPF__.
>>
>> This patch defines __bpf__ as a target macro for BPF.
>> Tested in bpf-unknown-none.
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * config/bpf/bpf.cc (bpf_target_macros): Define __bpf__ as a
>> target macro.
>> ---
>> gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc b/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc
>> index 7e37e080808..9cb56cfb287 100644
>> --- a/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc
>> +++ b/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.cc
>> @@ -291,6 +291,7 @@ void
>> bpf_target_macros (cpp_reader *pfile)
>> {
>> builtin_define ("__BPF__");
>> + builtin_define ("__bpf__");
>>
>> if (TARGET_BIG_ENDIAN)
>> builtin_define ("__BPF_BIG_ENDIAN__");
>> --
>> 2.30.2
>>
>
> Having multiple choices in this case seems to just add confusion to
> users and making code search slightly more inconvenient.
>
> How much code uses LLVM specific __bpf__? Can it be migrated? Should
> LLVM undefine the macro instead?
I agree that it would be better to support just one form of the target
macro. Having two alternative forms can only lead to problems.
But I think the train left the station long ago to do any better: there
are files in the kernel tree that rely on __bpf__ and there may be BPF
programs around doing the same thing.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-30 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-29 20:15 Jose E. Marchesi
2022-08-30 0:31 ` Fangrui Song
2022-08-30 16:45 ` Jose E. Marchesi [this message]
2022-08-30 17:24 ` Fangrui Song
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bks1istm.fsf@oracle.com \
--to=jose.marchesi@oracle.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=maskray@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).