Horton

Re: LLVM 16 (opaque pointers)

Devrim Gündüz <devrim@gunduz.org>

View thread
From: Devrim Gündüz <devrim@gunduz.org>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>, Ronan Dunklau <ronan.dunklau@aiven.io>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>
Date: 2023-09-21T00:24:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. jit: Adjust back-patch of f90b4a84 to 12 and 13.

  2. Log LLVM library version in configure output.

  3. jit: Changes for LLVM 17.

  4. jit: Supply LLVMGlobalGetValueType() for LLVM < 8.

  5. jit: Support opaque pointers in LLVM 16.

  6. jit: Reference function pointer types via llvmjit_types.c.

Hi Thomas,

On Thu, 2023-09-21 at 08:22 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> So far I've tested LLVM versions 10, 15, 16, 17, 18 (= their main
> branch) against PostgreSQL versions 14, 15, 16.  I've attached the
> versions that apply to master and 16, and pushed back-patches to 14
> and 15 to public branches if anyone's interested[1].  Back-patching
> further seems a bit harder.  I'm quite willing to do it, but ... do we
> actually need to, ie does anyone really *require* old PostgreSQL
> release branches to work with new LLVM?

RHEL releases new LLVM version along with their new minor releases every
6 month, and we have to build older versions with new LLVM each time.
>From RHEL point of view, it would be great if we can back-patch back to
v12 :(

Regards,
-- 
Devrim Gündüz
Open Source Solution Architect, PostgreSQL Major Contributor
Twitter: @DevrimGunduz , @DevrimGunduzTR