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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210501151538.145449-1-masahiroy@kernel.org> <8b5f1d57-1357-affd-565f-f4826f3ecbdf@csgroup.eu>
In-Reply-To: <8b5f1d57-1357-affd-565f-f4826f3ecbdf@csgroup.eu>
From:   Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 4 May 2021 11:13:01 +0900
Message-ID: <CAK7LNASv=ev=MbA+iXsjQvKGe69+AmL7Ri7WQc9caoZpfyzEgw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Raise the minimum GCC version to 5.2
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        "open list:SIFIVE DRIVERS" <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 3:17 PM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 01/05/2021 =C3=A0 17:15, Masahiro Yamada a =C3=A9crit :
> > The current minimum GCC version is 4.9 except ARCH=3Darm64 requiring
> > GCC 5.1.
> >
> > When we discussed last time, we agreed to raise the minimum GCC version
> > to 5.1 globally. [1]
> >
> > I'd like to propose GCC 5.2 to clean up arch/powerpc/Kconfig as well.
>
> One point I missed when I saw your patch first time, but I realised durin=
g the discussion:
>
> Up to 4.9, GCC was numbered with 3 digits, we had 4.8.0, 4.8.1, ... 4.8.5=
, 4.9.0, 4.9.1, .... 4.9.4
>
> Then starting at 5, GCC switched to a 2 digits scheme, with 5.0, 5.1, 5.2=
, ... 5.5
>
> So, that is not GCC 5.1 or 5.2 that you should target, but only GCC 5.
> Then it is up to the user to use the latest available version of GCC 5, w=
hich is 5.5 at the time
> begin, just like the user would have selected 4.9.4 when 4.9 was the mini=
mum GCC version.
>
> Christophe


One line below in Documentation/process/changes.rst,
I see

     Clang/LLVM (optional)  10.0.1           clang --version


Clang 10.0.1 is a bug fix release of Clang 10


I do not think GCC 5.2 is strange when we
want to exclude the initial release of GCC 5.


--=20
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada