Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp1918428pxb; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 03:32:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxtDPFkrG0Q3p0LFqLVzfi7iFAXE0M/3k5NqoZWE/stYxBJ9kxWMzO1ZBMIw/KtS4Gba83s X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a195:: with SMTP id s21mr7549091ejy.435.1610969558679; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 03:32:38 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1610969558; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=noba4LUYhHvv144+vVys3vAkJeV8YjK3g6Temn1KKBWbB52QF7eDOEwz9ijsyGfudP j+9nOqV4gZZfrmitc2gIa7rLvdTt/F4IAie1bLik+wc8041rLxYwJglxcOHh80PIb12z tfGqg2zM8D4jyi+zbyzUQ0FvA2E5h4TKfb8xxf6fkhy9QrBVF4SmUgaaRXnMwY4O4GgT WqJEopFHSYIG7Sul/2ImxzdOkirlpr746vU8bAayVXUljZjadtTdKOLEGL7XinJZfGU8 TeIrjEzO5Ppfqqh11dQi6Tg6MzdQWao2F0W1GUxckplOxtlmwjq+JJp+uAuQT+IZB6DP HFFg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from; bh=Nw2ZLGbNXQGKIblqQLSLfvwwJDxat5+Y5Om/BWz+vFo=; b=Je2W9MxkpHa4rMorlz2kSdB+m8MSe8iFse5Eo35BoW4SC2STwheX6dgxstyhURL49G CLCAR1zsIDOJrv+2pR+yrxkpYOy2aTLydvShMMPbdYaJSDIyInMbV/wiIjVuWTq5NoYz mseaCu8BOFLywoR6lkhCnJvQ2do04Y8VqQI13YA398rNY9ysdtuH8+osvab/7JjhhCj4 P93VX22rxcdhcvGSh6gIy+d6nD64AeXb5Wy8gZOrt7ZprRz3ivdw5Jt3M2pZVF44YKF5 dpI5g7/YZi06INp5TDyKm8S7d62bYshvha9hz7Ec/BKgKHskX8dZPHeL4FyCU2WVBkBD /2nA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=collabora.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g9si6575436ejj.456.2021.01.18.03.32.15; Mon, 18 Jan 2021 03:32:38 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=collabora.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390297AbhARL3k (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 18 Jan 2021 06:29:40 -0500 Received: from bhuna.collabora.co.uk ([46.235.227.227]:42614 "EHLO bhuna.collabora.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390270AbhARL3G (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2021 06:29:06 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: aratiu) with ESMTPSA id A53081F44CE7 From: Adrian Ratiu To: Arnd Bergmann , Adrian Ratiu Cc: Linux ARM , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Ard Biesheuvel , Arvind Sankar , clang-built-linux , Collabora kernel ML , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND 1/2] arm: lib: xor-neon: remove unnecessary GCC < 4.6 warning In-Reply-To: References: <20210118105557.186614-1-adrian.ratiu@collabora.com> <20210118105557.186614-2-adrian.ratiu@collabora.com> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 13:28:18 +0200 Message-ID: <87wnwafprh.fsf@iwork.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 18 Jan 2021, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 11:56 AM Adrian Ratiu > wrote: >> >> From: Nathan Chancellor >> >> Drop warning because kernel now requires GCC >= v4.9 after >> commit 6ec4476ac825 ("Raise gcc version requirement to 4.9") >> and clarify that -ftree-vectorize now always needs enabling for >> GCC by directly testing the presence of CONFIG_CC_IS_GCC. >> >> Another reason to remove the warning is that Clang exposes >> itself as GCC < 4.6 so it triggers the warning about GCC which >> doesn't make much sense and risks misleading users. >> >> As a side-note remark, -fttree-vectorize is on by default in >> Clang, but it currently does not work (see linked issues). >> >> Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/496 Link: >> https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/503 >> Reported-by: Nick Desaulniers >> Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers >> Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor >> Signed-off-by: Adrian Ratiu > > Shouldn't there be a check for whatever minimum version of clang > produces optimized code now? As I understand it, the warning was > originally meant to complain about both old gcc and any version > of clang, while waiting for a new version of clang to produce > vectorized code. > > Has that happened now? No, clang does not produce vectorized code by default, not even with the -ftree-vectorize flag explicitely added like in the next patch in this series (that flag is enabled by default in clang anyway, so no effect). Clang needs more investigation and testing because with additional code changes it can be "forced" to output vectorized code, but that is outside the scope of this series. If you think it's a good idea I can add a warning only for Clang which makes more sense than telling clang users to upgrade their GCC, since now Clang is officially supported. What do you think? > > Arnd