From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EE9AC433DB for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 18:44:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24EB023B55 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 18:44:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728404AbhANSoJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:44:09 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35354 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726131AbhANSoI (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:44:08 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-x229.google.com (mail-lj1-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::229]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 062B4C061757 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 10:43:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x229.google.com with SMTP id u21so7653408lja.0 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 10:43:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zSikxUCCmMuKlcIVNKMSQLXHoh+mKFmmNfXZP34ywo0=; b=P9qp87pav/O9NmAX8hvOtK6ylaKismTYgOWaQMdNoCTKbWdOpzqtQ5sUhYdXNSwHdI k+genNv1iPZxLYBL19FxOCzz9z5Kv0lkZh5yI4p1DIU70/NnoC5nstKgXQ2+Lqi43IdL qGQKNMfNYkFJ9OC3FsVPcemTj4NjdInXnw4hk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zSikxUCCmMuKlcIVNKMSQLXHoh+mKFmmNfXZP34ywo0=; b=AcY70t7z131MkPNRDPs/XYHyyYY7pFz/+UCZk3QFr3ZzxZI9i8V6Qu4MEU6xJCZkHj /f3nun8vhh5RJ03KdKt0uiOHivYITgKWOXlWVgCzSGjnuT+cHNm5j9nd+OoTu1dG5jpl Cgw7jbbWXH9AjHjDewE83qvcpmPOA74BYcem11jEU6wSqgYSc0C+jYgcos7cZt3hA2NY KZneDgRchqrH6dFYCRqirHAOoS0vdbJ8cLWZkOuC+QEdphM8J5v2cFG7jdZQRTViACrE H2X6U/Pre+DzoXHnATTUjHdR3mg75moaROIahqiiU4BdhJ4Fqxa4SXHKORiBaR/Y4scc sizQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328uD24B252plHBYXTOSKsf3OVLpZbD9rY867MoBo9oV1m41jHT Yv8WV+EEv3UGpElyQXThtWv/7KHjlMrQwg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzmnDJaqZ/JTcOPYkpdoIRqSl5GxwdCEGisl98Xs5vxj5uIkSRk9nr32hFYToVMh21ITU7YcA== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8714:: with SMTP id m20mr3519792lji.320.1610649805888; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 10:43:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-f169.google.com (mail-lj1-f169.google.com. [209.85.208.169]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j5sm621560lfu.139.2021.01.14.10.43.24 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Jan 2021 10:43:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-f169.google.com with SMTP id n11so7637063lji.5 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 10:43:24 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9b13:: with SMTP id u19mr3568946lji.48.1610649803879; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 10:43:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210112224832.10980-1-will@kernel.org> <161055398865.21762.12236232732054213928.b4-ty@arm.com> <20210113214436.GL1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 10:43:07 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] compiler.h: Raise minimum version of GCC to 5.1 for arm64 To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux admin , Florian Weimer , Arnd Bergmann , "Cc: Android Kernel" , "Theodore Ts'o" , Peter Zijlstra , Catalin Marinas , Masahiro Yamada , Nick Desaulniers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Will Deacon , linux-arm-kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 12:18 AM Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > So if the arguments are piling up, what is holding us back, other than > inertia? I think we can most certainly just try increasing the minimum version to 5.1 in the next merge window and see. > Note that banning 4.9 for arm64 and banning it in general should be > two different changes in any case, as the former will need to be > backported to -stable kernels as well. Yes. The arm64 issue is a clear and known bug, plus I suspect gcc-4.9 is ridiculously old in the arm64 ecosystem anyway. So the arm64 issue is a bug-fix, the follow-up of just upgrading gcc requirements in general would be a "keep up with the times, and allow those variable declarations in loops". Linus