From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53968C5478C for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:03:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.686753.1069189 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfNKo-0003u3-N5; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:03:10 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 686753.1069189; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:03:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfNKo-0003tw-KC; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:03:10 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 686753; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:03:09 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-sth1-in.inumbo.com ([159.253.27.254] helo=se1-gles-sth1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rfNKn-0003tq-DJ for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:03:09 +0000 Received: from mail-lf1-x12f.google.com (mail-lf1-x12f.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::12f]) by se1-gles-sth1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 3ef3352f-d65b-11ee-afd8-a90da7624cb6; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 18:03:08 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lf1-x12f.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-512f3e75391so4933495e87.2 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 09:03:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.206.239] ([94.75.70.14]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i10-20020a198c4a000000b00512dbd9cf32sm274786lfj.54.2024.02.28.09.03.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 28 Feb 2024 09:03:07 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: 3ef3352f-d65b-11ee-afd8-a90da7624cb6 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1709139788; x=1709744588; darn=lists.xenproject.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=30nIXP+od+UEsjVHmY9H6m9mbcUi/8rjFTWK7dcCxL4=; b=Aflv6hxGy0Z8tArcQ6DuuRwsDbCSSx4rH4hSOlJ03egMjJPHD0JsUFVhCbVg6W7ELT WLsCj/SJKerKar+dLTXDZoy18MbbXUQWDbQY9B8jEXe7slowYHdgCanV3iRlMBUfgXSG O/gHmNYQV6CGz1aLAbJHc8o7WHlpNFGwxrN/4Rm5ViCTfsDAKy3819SxH8+SePNvD/1a WQOL7nwS9pdGt7BZyAWOW2Mm7bgmoySK5kiLiNi5cVg/OwV+ZafkL6W1D69gwgyyOj3z lavMTgb8B4u061WfEMyLTB7wDvFHmq08AA23iVhahPfmuVsxXBv/tC+ZuWjrVAIjJw7R MHvw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709139788; x=1709744588; h=mime-version:user-agent:content-transfer-encoding:references :in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=30nIXP+od+UEsjVHmY9H6m9mbcUi/8rjFTWK7dcCxL4=; b=vHOROFeF6LXpXRpahm3Ubsv3ChMfHgTnar4MAR/BZ1lg55XSzn348jx1IftL/PlY83 WlVcJUgJuXDFZvuj952/zXpqcm99E5VVpr1dX3CQcFWB8JeCVIcUhq5qZo3fsJyoKvd/ 4JxxjmPjJWtwI3IMDaXu0L5rIx933EdfE825OFanM9OCanpkgEwOsAhmlRZBk1vqYMjd xQnQoLEBd2ipxWhYgd9H5Sz/lTLuwRA47P40XI8TNbQir87juj6HWMgDrI6S1WOq6tv+ d8ekVDPSLO+SGIFGMJDipp7s9RJM5gn9sI5IW6ykWMMXa7hZPToftHhy21IWKUh8IP56 wrXw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU9HWK5f5b3k+K++oh0U2sqCTMCo8ihzNUOskTXI/xj8FRineqGs4diHh32E3D+YLUz6udTUKArLQL1161ME31vQdj+83ZIQLf7VEau9MQ= X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy9z52ivFYdpjyoJtsvk7KiNg4MEzJuzzwwC6JlHPdFpSKoPNAe 6Sym7m0N/H6Fe1xG5WY3C4ehiBtkI9DmPhPKO9wyXVzhcBTdahrg X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHXlJZqNm+PSjjEfTml7jOtdStwEmV7hJWTn+x6bByrM3DEgf2BSaWdZZ/Pq/YS0Z6AzvKvvQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:43d5:0:b0:512:bda2:7bd9 with SMTP id u21-20020ac243d5000000b00512bda27bd9mr126627lfl.64.1709139787434; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 09:03:07 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 23/23] xen/README: add compiler and binutils versions for RISC-V64 From: Oleksii To: Jan Beulich Cc: Andrew Cooper , George Dunlap , Julien Grall , Stefano Stabellini , Wei Liu , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 18:03:06 +0100 In-Reply-To: <73a38d85-0798-4cfa-8625-0f8c9e05b2a3@suse.com> References: <73a38d85-0798-4cfa-8625-0f8c9e05b2a3@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.50.2 (3.50.2-1.fc39) MIME-Version: 1.0 On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 08:55 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 26.02.2024 18:39, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: > > This patch doesn't represent a strict lower bound for GCC and > > GNU Binutils; rather, these versions are specifically employed by > > the Xen RISC-V container and are anticipated to undergo continuous > > testing. >=20 > Up and until that container would be updated to a newer gcc. I'm > afraid I view this as too weak a criteria, but I'm also not meaning > to > stand in the way if somebody else wants to ack this patch in this > form; > my bare minimum requirement is now met. >=20 > > --- a/README > > +++ b/README > > @@ -48,6 +48,15 @@ provided by your OS distributor: > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - For ARM 64-bit: > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - GCC 5.1 or later > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - GNU Binutils 2.24 or= later > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - For RISC-V 64-bit: > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - GCC 12.2 or later > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - GNU Binutils 2.39 or late= r > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 This doesn't represent a st= rict lower bound for GCC and > > GNU Binutils; > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 rather, these versions are = specifically employed by the > > Xen RISC-V > > +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 container and are anticipat= ed to undergo continuous > > testing. >=20 > As per above, I think here it really needs saying "at the time of > writing" > or recording a concrete date. Furthermore I expect "these versions" > relates > to the specifically named versions and particularly _not_ to "or > later": > With the criteria you apply, using later versions (or in fact any > version > other than the very specific ones used in the container) would be > similarly > untested. Much like x86 and Arm don't have the full range of > permitted > tool chain versions continuously tested. Plus don't forget that > distros may > apply their own selection of patches on top of what they take from > upstream > (and they may also take random snapshots rather than released > versions). >=20 > IOW it is hard for me to see why RISC-V needs stronger restrictions > here > than other architectures. It ought to be possible to determine a > baseline > version. Even if taking the desire to have "pause" available as a > requirement, gas (and presumably gld) 2.36.1 would already suffice. I'll be happy to determine a baseline version and RISC-V doesn't need stronger restriction that why I wrote: "This patch doesn't represent a strict lower bound for GCC and GNU Binutils". Would it be good to use for GCC -> "12.2 or later" and for Binutils -> "2.36.1 or later"? I missed that I've pushed RISC-V contrainer without fixing version of archlinux, so you are right that after container update what I wrote won't be true, as compiler version might be changed. Just for clarifying when the version will be agreed, does it mean that I should use a toolchain with mentioned version in this file and each time to verify that everything still working with this versions? ~ Oleksii