[flang][Driver] When linking with the Fortran runtime, the addArchSpecificRPath() should be called too

[pawosm-arm]

When linking with other runtimes (OpenMP, sanitizers), the addArchSpecificRPath() is being called. The same thing should happen when linking with the Fortran runtime, this will improve user experience massively.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-flang-driver
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-driver

Author: Paul Osmialowski (pawosm-arm)

Changes

When linking with other runtimes (OpenMP, sanitizers), the addArchSpecificRPath() is being called. The same thing should happen when linking with the Fortran runtime, this will improve user experience massively.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/114837.diff

2 Files Affected:

• (modified) clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/CommonArgs.cpp (+1)
• (modified) flang/test/Driver/arch-specific-libdir-rpath.f95 (+7)

diff --git a/clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/CommonArgs.cpp b/clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/CommonArgs.cpp
index 1c3c8c816594e5..ca06fb115dfa11 100644
--- a/clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/CommonArgs.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/CommonArgs.cpp
@@ -1293,6 +1293,7 @@ void tools::addFortranRuntimeLibs(const ToolChain &TC, const ArgList &Args,
     }
     CmdArgs.push_back("-lFortranRuntime");
     CmdArgs.push_back("-lFortranDecimal");
+    addArchSpecificRPath(TC, Args, CmdArgs);
   }
 
   // libomp needs libatomic for atomic operations if using libgcc
diff --git a/flang/test/Driver/arch-specific-libdir-rpath.f95 b/flang/test/Driver/arch-specific-libdir-rpath.f95
index cc09938f7d1e28..23fb52abfbd574 100644
--- a/flang/test/Driver/arch-specific-libdir-rpath.f95
+++ b/flang/test/Driver/arch-specific-libdir-rpath.f95
@@ -16,6 +16,13 @@
 !
 ! Test that -rpath is added
 !
+! Add LIBPATH, RPATH
+!
+! RUN: %flang %s -### --target=x86_64-linux \
+! RUN:     -resource-dir=%S/../../../clang/test/Driver/Inputs/resource_dir_with_arch_subdir \
+! RUN:     -frtlib-add-rpath 2>&1 \
+! RUN:   | FileCheck --check-prefixes=RESDIR,LIBPATH-X86_64,RPATH-X86_64 %s
+!
 ! Add LIBPATH, RPATH for OpenMP
 !
 ! RUN: %flang %s -### --target=x86_64-linux -fopenmp \

[Meinersbur]

addSanitizerRuntime and addOpenMPRuntime are already calling addArchSpecificRPath. It it a problem if rpath is added multiple times?

Compiler-rt libs (libclang_rt.*.a) are added as absolute paths, shouldn't the Fortran-runtime do the same?

[pawosm-arm]

addSanitizerRuntime and addOpenMPRuntime are already calling addArchSpecificRPath. It it a problem if rpath is added multiple times?

I've been testing it with and without -fopenmp and didn't observe any problem

Compiler-rt libs (libclang_rt.*.a) are added as absolute paths, shouldn't the Fortran-runtime do the same?

This makes sense for static libraries, Fortran-runtime can be built static or shared, and in case of shared lib, the rpath issue starts to kick in.

[Meinersbur]

LGTM

[pawosm-arm]

addSanitizerRuntime and addOpenMPRuntime are already calling addArchSpecificRPath. It it a problem if rpath is added multiple times?

For a reference, in case of Clang and C code utilizing OpenMP, -rpath is given at least twice: "/usr/bin/ld" .... "-rpath" "/opt/llvm/lib/clang/20/lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu" "-rpath" "/opt/llvm/bin/../lib/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu" "-L/opt/llvm/lib"

[pawosm-arm]

If there are no objections by others, I'll merge it some time tomorrow.