Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qqVZG-00AfuO-KT for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:31:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qqVZE-00EiOu-BM for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:31:49 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qqVZE-00EiOe-0Z for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:31:48 +0000 Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::336]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qqVZC-00165P-05 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:31:47 +0000 Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4054f790190so65026025e9.2 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 02:31:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aiven.io; s=google; t=1697016704; x=1697621504; darn=lists.postgresql.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=gAKX/aN91JgS4we3WH+T5sJGVR20yR12QB7cPnHiZO4=; b=RQgkYNtH5qvYnp4Cpah7/hSHjq+8CBZhbr3cOFO0wMDnl5z0YdnWvffRzUI/b369mz 2tzdaEv20LMvznNOV38TafbtkOaJgFI1UzMkCDa/A1QKRDYWcDeOtxtBTpfqngeencM/ k3lbzkCvZnYDtadV9cc0z0HfDxA8iTY3FvutY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697016704; x=1697621504; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=gAKX/aN91JgS4we3WH+T5sJGVR20yR12QB7cPnHiZO4=; b=Zh/1x1+ZaZqAIKW6Yr5IppABNx8LHPzQ6WpUorhkeiS46YN6m9SzjKsh01e3J52hZs TDSqIC3QInlzP9npaQG6WeqWUFbc858D2zvbn6lNTK3lwQmKC1y3l9OOmIhrvBf2+ULe N+WSvVmri6uyee6XL+d3Zy/vMqnT3hd3ZvzK5FNgPZQVeuVDVVE09iPKcYZbYvtcY3Hl t0c/SnIqP+jnXa4QtVns/mwqSddhUwtHpvGkeBVoWAGrZa7NsIr90Il1Uogj8rLbAWN4 jBLuqnOGmPnD6nWH9xwLExgSh8MDMSYPLPOAbWQvCycgw6B3uOW7XhMfotMCJxydVkQc WQLA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy17AgJlE02NK22Cb51Z1H63G0xm/o/Ofrk0cMT4qk06K0QOq1p BZMvrFibXbQ5XwVT7FHccqKdOg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEUXHI+BxrkUJIs2l4ohb6pgkbf9dPmQqWEfavbAfOQCSL/uVLTzi1kVYsI8DISF1vdzXSZEA== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cd8e:0:b0:406:45c1:a657 with SMTP id y14-20020a7bcd8e000000b0040645c1a657mr17141524wmj.6.1697016704366; Wed, 11 Oct 2023 02:31:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aivenlaptop.localnet ([45.13.105.93]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w15-20020adfcd0f000000b0030647449730sm15067142wrm.74.2023.10.11.02.31.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 11 Oct 2023 02:31:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Ronan Dunklau To: Devrim =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=FCnd=FCz?= , Thomas Munro Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers , Fabien COELHO , Andres Freund , Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> Subject: Re: LLVM 16 (opaque pointers) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 11:31:43 +0200 Message-ID: <5716086.DvuYhMxLoT@aivenlaptop> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Le mercredi 11 octobre 2023, 10:59:50 CEST Thomas Munro a =E9crit : > The back-patch to 12 was a little trickier than anticipated, but after > taking a break and trying again I now have PG 12...17 patches that > I've tested against LLVM 10...18 (that's 54 combinations), in every > case only with the clang corresponding to LLVM. Thank you Thomas for those patches, and the extensive testing, I will run m= y=20 own and let you know. > I've attached only the patches for master, but the 12-16 versions are > available at https://github.com/macdice/postgres/tree/llvm16-$N in > case anyone has comments on those. =46or PG13 and PG12, it looks like the ExecEvalBoolSubroutineTemplate is no= t=20 used anywhere, as ExecEvalBoolSubroutine was introduced in PG14 if I'm not= =20 mistaken.=20 Best regards, =2D- Ronan Dunklau