[Llvm-bgq-discuss] Patches for r176829-20130309 (the current vesta version)

[Jeff Hammond]

Thanks for pointing this out.  I'll file a bug with IBM and ask them
to fix this so that it works with all compilers properly.

Jeff

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Michael Kruse
<MichaelKruse at meinersbur.de> wrote:
> 2013/4/17 Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov>:
>>> Is the inlining problem related to
>>> http://clang.llvm.org/compatibility.html#inline?
>>
>> Yes, that's correct. Maybe we should turn on the gnu-style inline interpretation in the header file? FWIW, never versions of the glibc headers have fixed this issue, so our problem really is just that we have older system headers. Nevertheless, we should probably make this as easy as possible for the users.
>
> Why glibc? The problem is the line
>
> #ifndef __INLINE__
> #define __INLINE__ extern inline __attribute__((always_inline))
> #endif
>
> in /bgsys/drivers/ppcfloor/hwi/include/common/compiler_support.h This
> is gnu89-style inline. gcc should also use C99 semantics with the
> switch -std=c99 or -std=gnu99 . Maybe it's the
> __attribute__((always_inline)) that makes the difference? In my own
> code I use
>
> #if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__GNUC_STDC_INLINE__)
> #define EXTERN_INLINE_DECLARATION extern inline
> #define EXTERN_INLINE_DEFINITION inline
> #else
> #define EXTERN_INLINE_DECLARATION inline
> #define EXTERN_INLINE_DEFINITION extern inline
> #endif
>
> to distinguish the cases.
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
> --
> Tardyzentrismus verboten!



-- 
Jeff Hammond
Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
University of Chicago Computation Institute
jhammond at alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond
https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond
ALCF docs: http://www.alcf.anl.gov/user-guides