Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Makefile: infer CROSS_COMPILE from SRCARCH for CC=clang LLVM_IAS=1

From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
	Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>,
	Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
	clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Makefile: infer CROSS_COMPILE from SRCARCH for CC=clang LLVM_IAS=1
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 08:50:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANiq72kya-9zeGN4uTqLMbAUMDGu-SQXRAwS9UTxceeObbN9yg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdm0xs4ikb0K0_b8Az0T=Kxu_-6AHjWHOhjsKZb3hTrH2A@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 2:19 AM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@google.com> wrote:
>
> maximally flexible."  We don't want folks generally using CC=clang;
> preferably they'd use LLVM=1.  I need to rewrite our docs to make that
> more explicit and straightforward.  And if folks would prefer to use
> CC=clang for whatever reason, let them explicitly state CROSS_COMPILE
> then.

Perhaps it would be nice to clarify the "level of support" for
`CC=clang` too, in particular long-term when `LLVM=1` works for all
architectures.

In other words, is `CC=clang` going to remain supported/maintained, or
it will be something that will still compile/boot but not expected to
be used by anyone in production, or dropped altogether (not the `CC`
option itself, of course, I refer to the mix of toolchains)?

Thanks,

Cheers,
Miguel