On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27 April 2017 at 20:43, Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: >> Android O moves to LLVM 3.9 and also has some differences in header >> dependencies as LLVM has moved to blueprint files. It seems libLLVMCore >> was only needed for header dependencies. >> >> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> >> --- >> Android.common.mk | 5 +++-- >> src/amd/Android.common.mk | 7 ++++++- >> src/gallium/auxiliary/Android.mk | 12 ++++++++---- >> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Android.common.mk b/Android.common.mk >> index a7b78bb910fc..8669492bec11 100644 >> --- a/Android.common.mk >> +++ b/Android.common.mk >> @@ -86,9 +86,10 @@ endif >> ifeq ($(MESA_ENABLE_LLVM),true) >> ifeq ($(MESA_ANDROID_MAJOR_VERSION),6) >> LOCAL_CFLAGS += -DHAVE_LLVM=0x0307 -DMESA_LLVM_VERSION_PATCH=0 >> - endif >> - ifeq ($(MESA_ANDROID_MAJOR_VERSION),7) >> + else ifeq ($(MESA_ANDROID_MAJOR_VERSION),7) >> LOCAL_CFLAGS += -DHAVE_LLVM=0x0308 -DMESA_LLVM_VERSION_PATCH=0 >> + else >> + LOCAL_CFLAGS += -DHAVE_LLVM=0x0309 -DMESA_LLVM_VERSION_PATCH=0 >> endif > Worth adding an error for "too new" Android versions? Can be folded as > part of my earlier suggestion to error out for old ones.
Useful if we stop paying attention to Android which wasn't my plan. Now with the libelf include paths dropped, this is really not what version of android do we have, but what version of LLVM do we have. I've not analyzed all the uses of HAVE_LLVM, but hopefully they are all written to check for minimum versions and new versions of LLVM will work even if we set 3.9 here. I'd hope the Linux side is not *that* fragile. Rob _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
