From: Nicolas Boichat <drink...@chromium.org>
When compiling with LLVM 6.0, the test fails to detect that
-latomic is actually required, as the atomic call is inlined.
In the code itself (src/util/disk_cache.c), we see this pattern:
p_atomic_add(cache->size, - (uint64_t)size);
where cache->size is an uint64_t *, and results in the following
link time error without -latomic:
src/util/disk_cache.c:628: error: undefined reference to '__atomic_fetch_add_8'
Fix the configure test to replicate this pattern, which then
correctly realizes the need for -latomic.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Boichat <drink...@chromium.org>
---
configure.ac | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index e874f8ebfb2..eff9a0ef88f 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -445,9 +445,11 @@ if test "x$GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED" = x1; then
AC_MSG_CHECKING(whether -latomic is needed)
AC_LINK_IFELSE([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
#include <stdint.h>
- uint64_t v;
+ struct {
+ uint64_t* v;
+ } x;
int main() {
- return (int)__atomic_load_n(&v, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);
+ return (int)__atomic_load_n(x.v, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);
}]])], GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_NEED_LIBATOMIC=no,
GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_NEED_LIBATOMIC=yes)
AC_MSG_RESULT($GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_NEED_LIBATOMIC)
if test "x$GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_NEED_LIBATOMIC" = xyes; then
--
2.17.0.rc1.321.gba9d0f2565-goog
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
