From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754221Ab0ESHOY (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 May 2010 03:14:24 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:38498 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753788Ab0ESHOW (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 May 2010 03:14:22 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 09:13:57 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , eric.dumazet@gmail.com, "Siddha, Suresh B" , Thomas Gleixner , Avi Kivity Subject: Re: Does anyone care about gcc 3.x support for *x86* anymore? Message-ID: <20100519071357.GB9618@elte.hu> References: <4BF33CAD.2070602@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BF33CAD.2070602@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: 1.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: s X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=1.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 1.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.4844] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (reposted with Andrew and Linus Cc:-ed too) * H. Peter Anvin wrote: > [Reposting as a separate thread] > > Recently, we have seen an increasing number of problems > with gcc 3.4 on x86; mostly due to poor constant > propagation producing not just bad code but failing to > properly eliminate what should be dead code. > > I'm wondering if there is any remaining real use of gcc > 3.4 on x86 for compiling current kernels (as opposed to > residual use for compiling applications on old > enterprise distros.) I'm specifically not referring to > other architectures here -- most of these issues have > been in relation to low-level arch-specific code, and as > such only affects the x86 architectures. Other > architectures may very well have a much stronger need > for continued support of an older toolchain. > > If there isn't a reason to preserve support, I would > like to consider discontinue support for using gcc 3 to > compile x86 kernels. If there is a valid use case, it > would be good to know what it is. > > -hpa > > -- > H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center > I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.