(re-sending as plain text) On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 2:38 AM Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > There are known-bugs with building a kernel with clang right now (I > pointed one out a few days ago about NULL checks being deleted from the > clang output for no good reason, which really is scary for obvious > reasons).
Is this the thread you are referring to? https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/27/1286 It's definitely something curious that I'll need to sit down and investigate more. If there are other known instances, it would be good to let me know. > So while it is great that small subsets of the kernel can > work properly (or hopefully properly), with clang, it still isn't ready > to be considered a "fully supported and we can't change the kernel if we > break using it" option, sorry. > And don't tie _anything_ to a LTS kernel, that's exactly what those > kernels are NOT for. You implement features and things in the kernel > when they are ready, and I'll pick a random LTS kernel out of the air > when I feel like it. Never should the two intersect and matter. > So please, work on fixing up clang for asm-goto and other "features" > that the kernel requires, and maybe when all build options/configs are > really solid and working well, will we be able to properly consider it > as a reason to implement, or not implement, something in the kernel > source. Acknowledged. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
