[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5jKCSFVhGSD5mGLiAo6-G+k24g2Y=9p8Kr2-SffAY=uEBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 13:52:24 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
kernel-build-reports@...ts.linaro.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [RFC] minimum gcc version for kernel: raise to gcc-4.3 or 4.6?
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> How about this approach then:
>
> - To keep it simple, we update the README.rst to say that a minimum
> gcc-4.3 is required, while recommending gcc-4.9 for all architectures
> - Support for gcc-4.0 and earlier gets removed from linux/compiler.h,
> and instead we add a summary of what I found, explaining that
> gcc-4.1 has active users on a few architectures.
> - We make the Makefile show a warning once during compilation for
> gcc earlier than 4.3.
This sounds good to me!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
Powered by blists - more mailing lists