[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/4] llvm: enable bpf
fontaine.fabrice at gmail.com
Sat Nov 3 14:45:15 UTC 2018
Le sam. 3 nov. 2018 à 15:24, Valentin Korenblit
<valentinkorenblit at gmail.com> a écrit :
> Fabrice, Thomas,
> Dear Thomas,
> Le sam. 3 nov. 2018 à 14:14, Thomas Petazzoni
> <thomas.petazzoni at bootlin.com> a écrit :
> On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 13:27:56 +0100, Fabrice Fontaine wrote:
> BPF (in-kernel bytecode machine) is needed by libv4l
> Signed-off-by: Fabrice Fontaine <fontaine.fabrice at gmail.com>
> package/llvm/llvm.mk | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> diff --git a/package/llvm/llvm.mk b/package/llvm/llvm.mk
> index 1f9bd447f5..dae5d3f16d 100644
> --- a/package/llvm/llvm.mk
> +++ b/package/llvm/llvm.mk
> @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_LLVM_AMDGPU),y)
> LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD += AMDGPU
> +# Build BPF (in-kernel bytecode machine)
> +LLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD += BPF
> Perhaps we should make this optional ? Or maybe the build time
> difference is not that significant ?
> llvm and clang are already taking a long time to build on my "old"
> machine, I didn't notice a significant difference with or without BPF
> but I didn't measure it.
> I think we should add a new option just like we did with AMDGPU backend
> as we said we were only going to build backend for target archictecture
> by default.
I would like some advice to add this option, this BPF option should be
selectable even if BR2_PACKAGE_LLVM is not set as llvm is not needed
on the target.
So should I put some kind of hidden option like:
and select it in libv4l/Config.in?
> Best regards,
> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> Best Regards,
> Best regards,
More information about the buildroot