From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Carstens Subject: Re: [RFC] minimum gcc version for kernel: raise to gcc-4.3 or 4.6? Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:59:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20161220095920.GD4893@osiris> References: <20161216105634.235457-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20161216170043.taaanbg5objnxjlh@breakpoint.cc> <2778134.jZdhGefl4B@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2778134.jZdhGefl4B@wuerfel> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Andrew Morton , kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Geert Uytterhoeven List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:00:27PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday, December 16, 2016 6:00:43 PM CET Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > On 2016-12-16 11:56:21 [+0100], Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > The original gcc-4.3 release was in early 2008. If we decide to still > > > support that, we probably want the first 10 quirks in this series, > > > while gcc-4.6 (released in 2011) requires none of them. > > > > It this min gcc thingy ARM only? > > This is part of the question that I'm trying to figure out myself. > > Clearly having the same minimum version across all architectures simplifies > things a lot, because many of the bugs in old versions are architecture > independent. Then again, some architectures implicitly require a new version > because an old one never existed (e.g. arm64 or risc-v), while some other > architectures may require an old version. FWIW, s390 requires gcc 4.3 or newer since two years already. For older compilers we enforce a compile error (see arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c). From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:42217 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934542AbcLTJ7f (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Dec 2016 04:59:35 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id uBK9xZ9T062397 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 04:59:35 -0500 Received: from e06smtp15.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp15.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.111]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 27ewc78p52-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 04:59:34 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp15.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 09:59:27 -0000 Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:59:20 +0100 From: Heiko Carstens Subject: Re: [RFC] minimum gcc version for kernel: raise to gcc-4.3 or 4.6? References: <20161216105634.235457-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20161216170043.taaanbg5objnxjlh@breakpoint.cc> <2778134.jZdhGefl4B@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2778134.jZdhGefl4B@wuerfel> Message-ID: <20161220095920.GD4893@osiris> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Andrew Morton , kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Geert Uytterhoeven Message-ID: <20161220095920.HtozE6c0tJHW_qN3HyaQVbA4M4oCm-E2eqakYFMsU5k@z> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:00:27PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday, December 16, 2016 6:00:43 PM CET Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > On 2016-12-16 11:56:21 [+0100], Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > The original gcc-4.3 release was in early 2008. If we decide to still > > > support that, we probably want the first 10 quirks in this series, > > > while gcc-4.6 (released in 2011) requires none of them. > > > > It this min gcc thingy ARM only? > > This is part of the question that I'm trying to figure out myself. > > Clearly having the same minimum version across all architectures simplifies > things a lot, because many of the bugs in old versions are architecture > independent. Then again, some architectures implicitly require a new version > because an old one never existed (e.g. arm64 or risc-v), while some other > architectures may require an old version. FWIW, s390 requires gcc 4.3 or newer since two years already. For older compilers we enforce a compile error (see arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c).