All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
Cc: aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: move GCC version check for ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 to Kconfig
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 19:45:56 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK7LNAS9hb+QarVNtH3t1fA5vitgwztNZm6y3jM+p8FckOez2g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-89887f62-7423-4fcf-9df5-f5777e6644db@palmer-si-x1c4>

Hi Palmer,

2018-09-06 18:45 GMT+09:00 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>:
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 01:33:53 PDT (-0700), yamada.masahiro@socionext.com
> wrote:
>>
>> This becomes much neater in Kconfig.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
>> ---
>>
>>  arch/riscv/Kconfig  | 1 +
>>  arch/riscv/Makefile | 2 --
>>  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> index a344980..ed81df4 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> @@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ config ARCH_RV32I
>>  config ARCH_RV64I
>>         bool "RV64I"
>>         select 64BIT
>> +       select ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 if GCC_VERSION >= 50000
>>         select HAVE_FUNCTION_TRACER
>>         select HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
>>         select HAVE_FTRACE_MCOUNT_RECORD
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Makefile b/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> index 61ec424..33700e4 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> @@ -25,8 +25,6 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I),y)
>>
>>         KBUILD_CFLAGS += -mabi=lp64
>>         KBUILD_AFLAGS += -mabi=lp64
>> -
>> -       KBUILD_CFLAGS   += $(call cc-ifversion, -ge, 0500,
>> -DCONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128)
>>
>>         KBUILD_MARCH = rv64im
>>         KBUILD_LDFLAGS += -melf64lriscv
>
>
> FWIW, while there isn't an official RISC-V GCC port that old (IIRC 6 was our
> first version, but it may have been 7) there are out-of-tree ports so I
> think this is OK to leave as it stands.


It is not my point.
I would not argue the minimum GCC version for RISC-V.


My motivation:

[1] Remove (or move to Kconfig)
    $(call cc-ifversion, ...) from Makefile.

    If you test the GCC version in arch/riscv/Makefile,
    scripts/gcc-version.sh  is invoked for every incremental build.


[2] Follow the macro naming convention

    We add CONFIG_ prefix to macros defined in Kconfig.

    I know some CONFIG options are defined in Makefiles,
    but my ultimate goal is to move all CONFIG options to Kconfig.

    See arch/{arm64,x86}/Kconfig that select ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128



If you think GCC 6 or 7 is the minimum,
please feel free to remove "if GCC_VERSION >= 50000",
but it is not my main interest here
(and it should be done as a separate work).



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: yamada.masahiro@socionext.com (Masahiro Yamada)
To: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] riscv: move GCC version check for ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 to Kconfig
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 19:45:56 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAK7LNAS9hb+QarVNtH3t1fA5vitgwztNZm6y3jM+p8FckOez2g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-89887f62-7423-4fcf-9df5-f5777e6644db@palmer-si-x1c4>

Hi Palmer,

2018-09-06 18:45 GMT+09:00 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>:
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 01:33:53 PDT (-0700), yamada.masahiro at socionext.com
> wrote:
>>
>> This becomes much neater in Kconfig.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
>> ---
>>
>>  arch/riscv/Kconfig  | 1 +
>>  arch/riscv/Makefile | 2 --
>>  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> index a344980..ed81df4 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
>> @@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ config ARCH_RV32I
>>  config ARCH_RV64I
>>         bool "RV64I"
>>         select 64BIT
>> +       select ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 if GCC_VERSION >= 50000
>>         select HAVE_FUNCTION_TRACER
>>         select HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
>>         select HAVE_FTRACE_MCOUNT_RECORD
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Makefile b/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> index 61ec424..33700e4 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/Makefile
>> @@ -25,8 +25,6 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I),y)
>>
>>         KBUILD_CFLAGS += -mabi=lp64
>>         KBUILD_AFLAGS += -mabi=lp64
>> -
>> -       KBUILD_CFLAGS   += $(call cc-ifversion, -ge, 0500,
>> -DCONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128)
>>
>>         KBUILD_MARCH = rv64im
>>         KBUILD_LDFLAGS += -melf64lriscv
>
>
> FWIW, while there isn't an official RISC-V GCC port that old (IIRC 6 was our
> first version, but it may have been 7) there are out-of-tree ports so I
> think this is OK to leave as it stands.


It is not my point.
I would not argue the minimum GCC version for RISC-V.


My motivation:

[1] Remove (or move to Kconfig)
    $(call cc-ifversion, ...) from Makefile.

    If you test the GCC version in arch/riscv/Makefile,
    scripts/gcc-version.sh  is invoked for every incremental build.


[2] Follow the macro naming convention

    We add CONFIG_ prefix to macros defined in Kconfig.

    I know some CONFIG options are defined in Makefiles,
    but my ultimate goal is to move all CONFIG options to Kconfig.

    See arch/{arm64,x86}/Kconfig that select ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128



If you think GCC 6 or 7 is the minimum,
please feel free to remove "if GCC_VERSION >= 50000",
but it is not my main interest here
(and it should be done as a separate work).



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-06 10:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-24  8:33 [PATCH] riscv: move GCC version check for ARCH_SUPPORTS_INT128 to Kconfig Masahiro Yamada
2018-08-24  8:33 ` Masahiro Yamada
2018-09-06  9:45 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-09-06  9:45   ` Palmer Dabbelt
2018-09-06 10:45   ` Masahiro Yamada [this message]
2018-09-06 10:45     ` Masahiro Yamada

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=CAK7LNAS9hb+QarVNtH3t1fA5vitgwztNZm6y3jM+p8FckOez2g@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@sifive.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.