lld and powerpc (32-bit, not powerpc64): What is FreeBSD's intent for head and going forward?

[Mark Millard]

http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-December/107981.html
("[llvm-dev] LLD status update and performance chart" 2016-Dec-11)

says in part:

> LLD supports x86, x86-64, x32, AArch64, AMDGPU, ARM, PPC64 and
> MIPS32/64, though completeness varies.


No mention is made of what FreeBSD calls TARGET_ARCH=powerpc .

What is FreeBSD's intent for TARGET_ARCH=powerpc for head (12+)
going forward?

Are things about TARGET_ARCH=powerpc that would involve lld not
to have llvm Depends On status for the META submittal for using
lld as the FreeBSD system linker? Similarly for the META
submittal for clang targeting powerpc (32-bit) if lld is
involved?

It would appear that without lld and the like TARGET_ARCH=powerpc
via clang would require an external binutils (or at least the
linker would need to be external).

Since I tend to explore TARGET_ARCH=powerpc64 and
TARGET_ARCH=powerpc and report evidence for issues that I
find, it would be good for me to know how I should view
things. For TARGET_ARCH=powerpc should I switch to using
an external binutils and ignore both lld and the old,
bootstrapped binutils? Would that be a better match to the
intent going forward?


[In recent months my TARGET_ARCH=powerpc activity has been
limited by clang code generation problems with the timing
of when R30 is restored for function exit vs. when it is
used when floating point is involved via R30 based
addressing. Also other time limitations have contributed
to a powerpc64 FreeBSD focus primarily.]

===
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net