All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
	kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
	Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Dmitriy Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Miguel Bernal Marin <miguel.bernal.marin@linux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, LKP <lkp@01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for GCC 4.4
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:29:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3=WNB2GCZfqNWUFpYf6M9gOZRGJhW0UViQueVNyp5JSg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170929075130.unemx3lbusjd6f6q@gmail.com>

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:51 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>> The kernel test robot report looked to be ignored as a "gcc-4.4 is too
>> old to worry about" thing. [...]
>
> No, and sorry if my first reply grumbling about how old GCC 4.4 is sounded that
> way! We have to live with compiler bugs no matter how old the compiler is, the
> release cycles are decoupled to such a degree and external tooling propagates with
> such high latencies that that's the only sane thing to do.
>
> We also officially support GCC 3.2 and later compilers. Had this regression not
> been resolved within a week or so I was fully ready to queue up a revert commit,
> no questions asked.

FWIW, we had a discussion about which compiler versions actually still work
earlier this year: We concluded that gcc-4.0 and earlier have been broken
for a while without anyone caring. gcc-4.1 support is kept working in certain
configurations primarily due to Geert using it for build testing, but my tests
across multiple architectures showed that gcc-4.3 is needed on most
other architectures already. Some architectures need  even newer ones, and
some features need compiler support that was added much later of course.

         Arnd

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for GCC 4.4
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 08:29:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a3=WNB2GCZfqNWUFpYf6M9gOZRGJhW0UViQueVNyp5JSg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170929075130.unemx3lbusjd6f6q@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1389 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:51 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
>> The kernel test robot report looked to be ignored as a "gcc-4.4 is too
>> old to worry about" thing. [...]
>
> No, and sorry if my first reply grumbling about how old GCC 4.4 is sounded that
> way! We have to live with compiler bugs no matter how old the compiler is, the
> release cycles are decoupled to such a degree and external tooling propagates with
> such high latencies that that's the only sane thing to do.
>
> We also officially support GCC 3.2 and later compilers. Had this regression not
> been resolved within a week or so I was fully ready to queue up a revert commit,
> no questions asked.

FWIW, we had a discussion about which compiler versions actually still work
earlier this year: We concluded that gcc-4.0 and earlier have been broken
for a while without anyone caring. gcc-4.1 support is kept working in certain
configurations primarily due to Geert using it for build testing, but my tests
across multiple architectures showed that gcc-4.3 is needed on most
other architectures already. Some architectures need  even newer ones, and
some features need compiler support that was added much later of course.

         Arnd

  reply	other threads:[~2017-09-29 15:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-28  7:47 [lkp-robot] [x86/asm] f5caf621ee: PANIC:double_fault kernel test robot
2017-09-28  7:47 ` kernel test robot
2017-09-28  7:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-09-28  7:59   ` Ingo Molnar
2017-09-28  8:18   ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-28  8:18     ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-28  8:49     ` Ingo Molnar
2017-09-28  8:49       ` Ingo Molnar
2017-09-28 11:49       ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-28 11:49         ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-09-28 16:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-09-28 16:21   ` Linus Torvalds
2017-09-28 16:44   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-28 16:44     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-28 17:01     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-28 17:01       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-28 19:10       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-28 19:10         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-28 21:58         ` [PATCH] x86/asm: Fix inline asm call constraints for GCC 4.4 Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-28 21:58           ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-28 23:53           ` Linus Torvalds
2017-09-28 23:53             ` Linus Torvalds
2017-09-29  1:40             ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-29  1:40               ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-29  8:01               ` Ingo Molnar
2017-09-29  8:01                 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-09-29 10:32                 ` Ye Xiaolong
2017-09-29 10:32                   ` Ye Xiaolong
2017-09-29  7:51             ` Ingo Molnar
2017-09-29  7:51               ` Ingo Molnar
2017-09-29 15:29               ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2017-09-29 15:29                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-09-29  9:27           ` [tip:x86/urgent] " tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-29  9:27             ` tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-29 11:18           ` tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf
2017-09-29 11:18             ` tip-bot for Josh Poimboeuf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAK8P3a3=WNB2GCZfqNWUFpYf6M9gOZRGJhW0UViQueVNyp5JSg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@01.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=miguel.bernal.marin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mka@chromium.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xiaolong.ye@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.