diff --git a/package/mesa3d/0003-configure.ac-rework-latomic-check.patch b/package/mesa3d/0003-configure.ac-rework-latomic-check.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..ee8107d2ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/mesa3d/0003-configure.ac-rework-latomic-check.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
+From 5865c7cb4e4ed1d63699e384ea52984448adfec9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
+Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 10:36:10 +0200
+Subject: [PATCH] configure.ac: rework -latomic check
+
+The configure.ac logic added in commit
+2ef7f23820a67e958c2252bd81eb0458903ebf33 ("configure: check if
+-latomic is needed for __atomic_*") makes the assumption that if a
+64-bit atomic intrinsic test program fails to link without -latomic,
+it is because we must use -latomic.
+
+Unfortunately, this is not completely correct: libatomic only appeared
+in gcc 4.8, and therefore gcc versions before that will not have
+libatomic, and therefore don't provide atomic intrinsics for all
+architectures. This issue was for example encountered on PowerPC with
+a gcc 4.7 toolchain, where the build fails with:
+
+powerpc-ctng_e500v2-linux-gnuspe/bin/ld: cannot find -latomic
+
+This commit aims at fixing that, by not assuming -latomic is
+available. The commit re-organizes the atomic intrinsics detection as
+follows:
+
+ (1) Test if a program using 64-bit atomic intrinsics links properly,
+     without -latomic. If this is the case, we have atomic intrinsics,
+     and we're good to go.
+
+ (2) If (1) has failed, then test to link the same program, but this
+     time with -latomic in LDFLAGS. If this is the case, then we have
+     atomic intrinsics, provided we link with -latomic.
+
+This has been tested in three situations:
+
+ - On x86-64, where atomic instrinsics are all built-in, with no need
+   for libatomic. In this case, config.log contains:
+
+   GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED_FALSE='#'
+   GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED_TRUE=''
+   LIBATOMIC_LIBS=''
+
+   This means: atomic intrinsics are available, and we don't need to
+   link with libatomic.
+
+ - On NIOS2, where atomic intrinsics are available, but some of them
+   (64-bit ones) require using libatomic. In this case, config.log
+   contains:
+
+   GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED_FALSE='#'
+   GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED_TRUE=''
+   LIBATOMIC_LIBS='-latomic'
+
+   This means: atomic intrinsics are available, and we need to link
+   with libatomic.
+
+ - On PowerPC with an old gcc 4.7 toolchain, where 32-bit atomic
+   instrinsics are available, but not 64-bit atomic instrinsics, and
+   there is no libatomic. In this case, config.log contains:
+
+   GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED_FALSE=''
+   GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED_TRUE='#'
+
+   With means that atomic intrinsics are not usable.
+
+Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>
+Upstream-status: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2018-May/194214.html
+---
+ configure.ac | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------
+ 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
+index f1fbdcc6c7..c94e547874 100644
+--- a/configure.ac
++++ b/configure.ac
+@@ -433,26 +433,31 @@ fi
+ AM_CONDITIONAL([SSE41_SUPPORTED], [test x$SSE41_SUPPORTED = x1])
+ AC_SUBST([SSE41_CFLAGS], $SSE41_CFLAGS)
+ 
+-dnl Check for new-style atomic builtins
+-AC_COMPILE_IFELSE([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
++dnl Check for new-style atomic builtins. We first check without linking to
++dnl -latomic.
++AC_LINK_IFELSE([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
++#include <stdint.h>
+ int main() {
+-    int n;
+-    return __atomic_load_n(&n, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);
++    uint64_t n;
++    return (int)__atomic_load_n(&n, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);
+ }]])], GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED=1)
++
++dnl If that didn't work, we try linking with -latomic, which is needed on some
++dnl platforms.
++if test "x$GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED" != x1; then
++   save_LDFLAGS=$LDFLAGS
++   LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS -latomic"
++   AC_LINK_IFELSE([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
++   #include <stdint.h>
++   int main() {
++        uint64_t n;
++        return (int)__atomic_load_n(&n, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);
++   }]])], GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED=1 LIBATOMIC_LIBS="-latomic")
++   LDFLAGS=$save_LDFLAGS
++fi
++
+ if test "x$GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_SUPPORTED" = x1; then
+     DEFINES="$DEFINES -DUSE_GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS"
+-    dnl On some platforms, new-style atomics need a helper library
+-    AC_MSG_CHECKING(whether -latomic is needed)
+-    AC_LINK_IFELSE([AC_LANG_SOURCE([[
+-    #include <stdint.h>
+-    uint64_t v;
+-    int main() {
+-        return (int)__atomic_load_n(&v, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);
+-    }]])], GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_NEED_LIBATOMIC=no, GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_NEED_LIBATOMIC=yes)
+-    AC_MSG_RESULT($GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_NEED_LIBATOMIC)
+-    if test "x$GCC_ATOMIC_BUILTINS_NEED_LIBATOMIC" = xyes; then
+-        LIBATOMIC_LIBS="-latomic"
+-    fi
+ fi
+ AC_SUBST([LIBATOMIC_LIBS])
+ 
+-- 
+2.14.3
+