[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100519071357.GB9618@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 09:13:57 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
eric.dumazet@...il.com,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Does anyone care about gcc 3.x support for *x86* anymore?
(reposted with Andrew and Linus Cc:-ed too)
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> [Reposting as a separate thread]
>
> Recently, we have seen an increasing number of problems
> with gcc 3.4 on x86; mostly due to poor constant
> propagation producing not just bad code but failing to
> properly eliminate what should be dead code.
>
> I'm wondering if there is any remaining real use of gcc
> 3.4 on x86 for compiling current kernels (as opposed to
> residual use for compiling applications on old
> enterprise distros.) I'm specifically not referring to
> other architectures here -- most of these issues have
> been in relation to low-level arch-specific code, and as
> such only affects the x86 architectures. Other
> architectures may very well have a much stronger need
> for continued support of an older toolchain.
>
> If there isn't a reason to preserve support, I would
> like to consider discontinue support for using gcc 3 to
> compile x86 kernels. If there is a valid use case, it
> would be good to know what it is.
>
> -hpa
>
> --
> H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
> I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists