From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752277AbVHGQ0M (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Aug 2005 12:26:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752278AbVHGQ0M (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Aug 2005 12:26:12 -0400 Received: from 167.imtp.Ilyichevsk.Odessa.UA ([195.66.192.167]:24201 "HELO port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752273AbVHGQ0M (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Aug 2005 12:26:12 -0400 From: Denis Vlasenko To: "David S. Miller" , bunk@stusta.de Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] remove support for gcc < 3.2 Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2005 19:25:52 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20050731222606.GL3608@stusta.de> <20050731.153631.70217457.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20050731.153631.70217457.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508071925.52221.vda@ilport.com.ua> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 01 August 2005 01:36, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Adrian Bunk > Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 00:26:07 +0200 > > > - my impression is that the older compilers are only rarely > > used, so miscompilations of a driver with an old gcc might > > not be detected for a longer amount of time > > Many people still use 2.95 because it's still the fastest > way to get a kernel build done and that's important for > many people. > > And with 4.0 being a scary regression in the compile time > performance area compared to 3.4, this becomes even more > important to keep around. This is a rather strange form of "progress", especially since in my experience newer gcc's do not show significant reductions in code size... -- vda