Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751234AbVL3JlP (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Dec 2005 04:41:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751235AbVL3JlP (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Dec 2005 04:41:15 -0500 Received: from willy.net1.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:3084 "EHLO willy.net1.nerim.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751234AbVL3JlO (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Dec 2005 04:41:14 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 10:38:49 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Jesper Juhl Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , arjan@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mpm@selenic.com Subject: Re: [patch 00/2] improve .text size on gcc 4.0 and newer compilers Message-ID: <20051230093849.GC30681@w.ods.org> References: <20051228212313.GA4388@elte.hu> <20051228214845.GA7859@elte.hu> <20051228201150.b6cfca14.akpm@osdl.org> <20051229073259.GA20177@elte.hu> <20051229231615.GV15993@alpha.home.local> <9a8748490512300033occeec40xab3b4f49624c08c5@mail.gmail.com> <20051230092800.GB30681@w.ods.org> <9a8748490512300137g190cc5fdub14f26d74c5973ca@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9a8748490512300137g190cc5fdub14f26d74c5973ca@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2760 Lines: 59 On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 10:37:08AM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote: > On 12/30/05, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 09:33:14AM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > > On 12/30/05, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Can't we elect a recommended gcc version that distro makers could > > > > ship under the name kgcc as it has been the case for some time, > > > > and try to stick to that version for as long as possible ? The only > > > > real reason to upgrade it would be to support newer archs, while at > > > > the moment, we try to support compilers which are shipped as default > > > > *user-space* compilers. > > > > > > > As I see it, doing that would > > > - put extra work on distributors. > > > > In the short term, yes. In the mid-term, I don't think so. Having one package > > which does not need to change and another one which evolves regardless of > > kernel needs is less work than ensuring that a single package is still > > compatible with everyone's needs. Think about support too : "what gcc version > > did you use ?" would simply become "did you build with kgcc ?" > > > > > - bloat users systems with the need to have two gcc versions installed. > > > > $ size /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i586-pc-linux-gnu/3.3.6/cc1 > > text data bss dec hex filename > > 3430228 2680 746688 4179596 3fc68c /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i586-pc-linux-gnu/3.3.6/cc1 > > > It's not much, agreed, but if the users regular gcc can build the > kernel it's still unnessesary extra bloat to have two gcc's. > But you are right, the bloat issue is just a minor thing. > > > > You don't even need libgcc nor c++ to build the kernel. Anyway, it should > > not be an absolute requirement, but the *recommended* and *supported* version. > > > > > - decrease testing with different gcc versions, which sometimes uncover bugs. > > > > gcc testing should not consume kernel developpers' time, but gcc's users. > > How many kernel bugs have finally been attributed to a recent change in gcc ? > > A lot I think. Uncovering bugs in gcc is useful but not the primary goal of > > kernel developpers. > > > That's not what I meant. I meant that building the kernel with > different gcc versions sometimes uncover bugs in the *kernel*. I was > not talking about finding bugs in gcc. OK. But there will always be people trying to build kernels with any gcc so I don't think we would lose this bug report channel anyway. > Jesper Juhl Willy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/