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=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=ham 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 6EC4FC433F5 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 21:27:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E322083F for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 21:27:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="c4Qrtmra" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 16E322083F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727607AbeIABgq (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2018 21:36:46 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f195.google.com ([209.85.215.195]:34882 "EHLO mail-pg1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727273AbeIABgp (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2018 21:36:45 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f195.google.com with SMTP id 7-v6so1041885pgf.2 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 14:27:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=YBQ1ZoKWYFj4NcZtxQekXOrFHaOketmXxdxkGOfL+s0=; b=c4QrtmraIxBojLH4IYr491Wu8YkUn+XFo/7C8DDdI+1Aj1vu/T55q2MFZYI5FGcmAw Ml5CX/s5NWrVcvMaG4roR9QlgowsECB7Ipn6Y97AuLRlFFdjdZpFYjhDfdVLE5W6vrW1 SZ35zVdCPeFcUt8FnbxZOn14Fc/tlBpWQPlSZn+bMKNsGD6FVUDzEjpNtwKxhB4qssW3 RuEaGlbIOcUd+eA73CECr2wnqjfmouP6wFVl8D+M5dfdc9qybaSLYY5wxiK+qrv4An6W sG+kbbzBbTFD3vDtbYmeD78A2quJ0ALOGSxU4ZcD71MeZSZjvJe3fmkt+n5pJkwk4oih f6lw== 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=YBQ1ZoKWYFj4NcZtxQekXOrFHaOketmXxdxkGOfL+s0=; b=Ma0+kayf/TbSZSHEZNgKTcCiUafWJ+elIosJnPUOIi3AgL1q9OUn2HkxYTgKmkK5N0 H1xuDJv73Fwgr0bc65ztNJGKlxvFTRarstgeyHZP73JM/SdbwxeKMB5AqiinU4KnNZKw u6z3PSrnmqswLhDKltEU2qJvkeC+bDDUL3gJjDPDeSj+ka0K6YkQl0HKE8JNUbCSkvSG 9NANe0/gxm3oouuv28UGor10A604B12ZglZgitEktaJvLMj+UG66UzgKPevjMbrjuVTZ 9N/yZcQMlx6Uh/Z4ckJVOOXPqPB+hXHQKWp+/lSbhD1ahfD2N2LXqYNJ5GDQsom/T2l3 coCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51B3ajMtpVOi/MU1jXnsx8zggqm5oNyoBx9X2WT0aiiR9QAGCMzT 4ax676Q0D4IKnBLda583egNa7q8GWAfHz049pvKYqQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdY84tGsvKlcQp13Kw1TOYcO+W6uBL4jIFkkgKq8SsdGCYwgeCpxtB/EXlsyTRmKGUSL+iorAluQrA/b6UQHcXI= X-Received: by 2002:a63:1363:: with SMTP id 35-v6mr16254112pgt.202.1535750844810; Fri, 31 Aug 2018 14:27:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180831170514.24665-1-miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Nick Desaulniers Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 14:27:13 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Compiler Attributes: remove unused attributes To: Miguel Ojeda Cc: joe@perches.com, Linus Torvalds , LKML , efriedma@codeaurora.org, sparse@chrisli.org, Kees Cook , Ingo Molnar , Geert Uytterhoeven , Arnd Bergmann , Greg KH , Masahiro Yamada , asmadeus@codewreck.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 1:23 PM Miguel Ojeda wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 8:43 PM, Nick Desaulniers > wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:28 AM Joe Perches wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, 2018-08-31 at 19:05 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > >> > __optimize and __deprecate_for_modules are unused in > >> > the whole kernel tree. Simply drop them. > >> > >> Nice series, thanks Miguel. > >> > >> It'd be good to have a cover letter for the series. > >> > >> And I believe there should be the equivalent of: > >> > >> #if GCC_VERSION < 40600 > >> # error Sorry, your compiler is too old - please upgrade it. > >> #endif > >> > >> for compiler-intel.h and compiler-clang.h so that > >> each supported compiler minimum version is checked. > >> > >> Is it clang > 13 and icc > 3 ? > > > > Eh, I'm not sure I want to commit yet to a specific minimal version of > > Clang. Right now, we're fixing things so depending on arch's and > > configs, the answer might be Top of Tree clang builds. For Pixel, we > > shipped with Clang-4, but pretty quickly we needed Clang-5. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/22/943 > > > > I had sent patches previously for detecting clang version from the C > > preprocessor, maybe I should dust those off, then commit to clang 5. > > In my opinion, even if you require clang 7, that is fine, as long as > we get a working build mainlined. Clang 7 is aggressive. I need to think more about how to call out when a specific set of configs for a given arch requires a compiler upgrade, without ending up with combinatoral explosion. I don't want to cross that bridge with this patch set. > > By the way, I am testing the series with clang 8 (2018-08-14) (after > reverting e501ce957a78), and it seems to work. Hopefully that makes > you happy! ;-) That makes me very happy. It indeed does produce a run-able executable, for some subset of configs, but can't be relied upon until we complete our implementation (WIP). CC me on any bugs you find for your configs. I'm also trying to keep a handle on things in https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues. > > > > > I don't think minimal supported versions are required for these clean > > ups, and would not block these patches from landing on that. > > > > Also, haven't found anyone using ICC yet to comment on minimal version > > requirements. > > For clang, by the way, __naked should go out of -gcc.h. Yep, Arnd's note in the other thread was a valuable insight and I agree with it. > I guess that > is breaking ARM clang builds at the moment (didn't check)? Huh? > I will > include the move for v3. > > Cheers, > Miguel -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers