From: Michael Meissner <meissner@spectacle-pond.org>
To: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Cc: Tim Riker <Tim@Rikers.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10?)
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 03:40:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20001104034002.A26612@munchkin.spectacle-pond.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa.g3i0smv.15loso7@ifi.uio.no> <fa.cjn9ksv.1a0m82t@ifi.uio.no> <ylbsvww97j.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
In-Reply-To: <ylbsvww97j.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>; from rra@stanford.edu on Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 10:19:12PM -0800
On Fri, Nov 03, 2000 at 10:19:12PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Tim Riker <Tim@Rikers.org> writes:
>
> > Agreed. C99 does not replace all the needed gcc features. We should
> > start using the ones that make sense, and push for
> > standardization/documentation on the rest.
>
> > I'm perfectly happy with this as a long term goal. I'll put what effort
> > I can into moving that direction without breaking the existing world as
> > we know it.
>
> May I tentatively suggest that one point at which your resources could
> productively be applied is towards improving the C99 compliance in gcc?
> Clearly for the near to medium future the compiler that everyone will use
> to build the Linux kernel will be gcc, which means that in order to use
> any C99 syntax, it first has to be solid in gcc. That means the best way
> of introducing such things into the Linux kernel is to *first* get the C99
> support solid, reliable, and efficient in gcc, then once a version of gcc
> is released with that support, help get Linux compiling with that version
> of gcc.
>
> *Then*, when that version of gcc can be made a prerequisite for the
> kernel, you can start switching constructs over to the C99 syntax that gcc
> supports.
Hmmmmm. Last month the compiler related thread on the kernel list was the
kernel couldn't move to newer versions of the compiler because the compiler had
changed things (where newer might mean either the latest snapshot de jour, or a
tested/appropriately patched version based off of the snapshots, or even 2.95).
Now people seem to be advocating moving the kernel to use features from C99
that haven't even been coded yet (which mean when coded using the latest
codegen as well). Note, I seriously doubt Linus will want a flag day (ie,
after a given kernel release, you must use revision n of the compiler, but
before that release, you must use revision n-1 of the compiler), so you still
have to maintain support for the old GCC way of doing things, in addition to
the C99 way of doing things probably for a year or so.
--
Michael Meissner, Red Hat, Inc.
PMB 198, 174 Littleton Road #3, Westford, Massachusetts 01886, USA
Work: meissner@redhat.com phone: +1 978-486-9304
Non-work: meissner@spectacle-pond.org fax: +1 978-692-4482
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-11-04 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.g3i0smv.15loso7@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.cjn9ksv.1a0m82t@ifi.uio.no>
2000-11-04 6:19 ` Russ Allbery
2000-11-04 8:40 ` Michael Meissner [this message]
2000-11-04 8:44 ` Russ Allbery
2000-11-06 12:06 ` Horst von Brand
2000-11-01 22:40 Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10 ? J . A . Magallon
2000-11-01 23:45 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02 0:21 ` Nathan Paul Simons
2000-11-02 0:11 ` David S. Miller
2000-11-02 0:32 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-02 18:55 ` non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-test10?) Tim Riker
2000-11-02 19:07 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 19:07 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-02 19:24 ` Ben Ford
2000-11-02 19:31 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-02 20:37 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2000-11-02 20:53 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-02 21:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2000-11-02 22:46 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2000-11-02 23:16 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-03 12:02 ` Martin Dalecki
2000-11-04 11:30 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-02 20:53 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 21:04 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-02 21:17 ` Alan Cox
2000-11-02 21:23 ` Andi Kleen
2000-11-04 11:37 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-07 16:33 ` Jes Sorensen
2000-11-07 20:52 ` Tim Riker
2000-11-07 21:06 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-11-07 22:08 ` David Lang
2000-11-07 21:36 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-11-08 0:04 ` yodaiken
2000-11-02 19:18 ` Andi Kleen
2000-11-04 5:34 ` Aaron Sethman
2000-11-06 17:14 ` Ralf Baechle
2000-11-02 20:21 ` Andi Kleen
2000-11-02 20:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2000-11-05 13:03 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-03 11:33 ` Thomas Pornin
2000-11-04 11:19 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-04 12:24 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-11-05 3:28 ` Michael Meissner
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=20001104034002.A26612@munchkin.spectacle-pond.org \
--to=meissner@spectacle-pond.org \
--cc=Tim@Rikers.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rra@stanford.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®