Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:21:29 +0200
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
       linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: drop support for gcc < 4.0
Message-ID: <20070821212129.GG30705@stusta.de>
References: <20070821132038.GA22254@ff.dom.local> <20070821093103.3c097d4a.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> <20070821173550.GC30705@stusta.de> <20070821191959.GC2642@bingen.suse.de> <20070821195433.GE30705@stusta.de> <alpine.LFD.0.999.0708211306560.30176@woody.linux-foundation.org> <20070821202113.GF30705@stusta.de> <27c412eea99f1f80a3002e9668bd31f8@kernel.crashing.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <27c412eea99f1f80a3002e9668bd31f8@kernel.crashing.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1779
Lines: 46

On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 10:49:49PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> How many people e.g. test -rc kernels compiled with gcc 3.2?
>
> Why would that matter?  It either works or not.  If it doesn't
> work, it can either be fixed, or support for that old compiler
> version can be removed.

One bug report "kernel doesn't work / crash / ... when compiled with
gcc 3.2, but works when compiled with gcc 4.2" will most likely be lost 
in the big pile of unhandled bugs, not cause the removal of gcc 3.2 
support...

> The only other policy than "only remove support if things are
> badly broken" would be "only support what the GCC team supports",
> which would be >= 4.1 now; and there are very good arguments for
> supporting more than that with the Linux kernel.

No, it's not about bugs in gcc, it's about kernel+gcc combinations that 
are mostly untested but officially supported.

E.g. how many kernel developers use kernels compiled without 
unit-at-a-time? And unit-at-a-time does paper over some bugs,
e.g. at about half a dozen section mismatch bugs I've fixed
recently are not present with it.

But as the discussions have shown gcc 4.0 is currently too high for 
making a cut, and it is not yet the right time for raising the minimum 
required gcc version.

> Segher

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
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/