From: Nick Desaulniers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Linux Kbuild mailing list <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: gcc 5 & 6 & others already out of date?
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:08:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOd=_gfTD24zEh9YpoNuBr_D+xjsefeb8sNXnSaU_UgnVRw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 6:37 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> I've been working on a (still in development) patch that tries to
> apply a few compile-time constant folding tricks to a widely used
> library function, so I wanted to make sure my trickery worked across
> all supported gcc versions for as many call sites as possible.
I'd imagine the kernel's inconsistent use of -ffreestanding per
architecture would be a blocker, if by library function you're
referring to a symbol that would typically be provided by the libc?
Do you have more info about what the specific issue you've observed is?
> Naturally, this means allyesconfig builds on the monster box.
> So all went well with a recent gcc and with clang. Then I tried gcc 5
> and gcc 6, and it wasn't fine. But it wasn't not fine because of my
> new code -- that all compiled just fine. Rather, it wasn't fine
> because of a modicum of other odd errors and fatal warnings
> throughout. I tried this with gcc 5 and gcc 6 and then got bored. I
> could test more versions need be. And I guess I could submit bug
> reports or write patches or work on fixing all those, if I actually
> cared about it. But I don't really care about it, and apparently
> neither does anybody else, because this isn't brand new breakage. And
> this all got me thinking...
Are the defconfigs totally broken with gcc-5 and gcc-6 and no one has noticed?
I wonder what versions of GCC KernelCI and linux kernel robot are testing with?
We have to maintain CI for all supported clang versions. You can see a
2D slice of our 5D build matrix: https://clangbuiltlinux.github.io/.
"I've never seen so much red in the galaxy!" "Hey, get back to work!"
We'd like to have the large window of supported versions that GCC
currently has; Clang's release cycle is also different from GCC's
though. I wouldn't point to clang's smaller version support window as
justification for GCC; we'd rather be more like GCC in that sense, not
the other way round!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-13 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-13 1:36 gcc 5 & 6 & others already out of date? Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-10-13 12:22 ` David Laight
2022-10-13 12:59 ` Mark Brown
2022-10-13 15:23 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-10-13 16:18 ` Willy Tarreau
2022-10-14 4:28 ` David Laight
2022-10-14 5:27 ` Willy Tarreau
2022-10-13 16:26 ` Mark Brown
2022-10-13 16:37 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-10-13 16:51 ` Willy Tarreau
2022-10-13 17:16 ` Mark Brown
2022-10-13 18:38 ` Florian Weimer
2022-10-13 20:23 ` Mark Brown
2022-10-14 6:15 ` Florian Weimer
2022-10-13 18:39 ` Florian Weimer
2022-10-13 21:03 ` Nick Desaulniers
2022-10-14 6:37 ` Florian Weimer
2022-10-13 21:08 ` Nick Desaulniers [this message]
2022-10-14 1:31 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-10-14 11:13 ` Mark Brown
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).