linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: drop support for gcc < 4.0
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:54:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070821195433.GE30705@stusta.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070821191959.GC2642@bingen.suse.de>

On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 09:19:59PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 07:35:50PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Obviously a gcc <= 3.4 [1], and therefore no unit-at-a-time.
> 
> Actually there are widely used 3.3 variants that support unit-at-a-time
> (e.g. 3.3-hammer which was shipped by several distributions for some time)
> 
> There are still a lot of systems around which use gcc 3.3 (less so with
> 3.4). Unless there's a major bug that is hard to work around I would
> prefer to keep it supported.
> 
> Bogus warnings should be relatively harmless.

How many kernel developers use such old gcc versions?

And how many people notice the valid modpost warnings that can indicate
a runtime Oops?

> > And it's becoming a real maintainance problem that not only this problem 
> > but also other problems like some section mismatches [2] are only 
> > present without unit-at-a-time.
> 
> The unit-at-a-time output order is not defined, so even if it works
> with the current compiler a compiler change might still trigger
> that problem. So it would be better to fix those anyways.

The example [2] from my email is guaranteed to not be a problem with 
unit-at-a-time (as long as unit-at-a-time implies 
inline-functions-called-once - and that's although theoretically 
possible quite unlikely to change in practice).

This example is for a bug that should be fixed, but my point is the
maintainability, IOW: issues with older compilers might not be 
discovered and fixed before they go into a stable kernel.

We currently support 6 different stable gcc release series plus heavily 
modified vendor branches like 3.3-hammer. We can discuss whether it is 
now already the right time, and where to make the cut, but medium-term 
we must reduce the number of supported compilers.

> -Andi

cu
Adrian

[2] example: static __init function with exactly one caller, and this
             caller is non-__init

-- 

       "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


  reply	other threads:[~2007-08-21 19:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20070821132038.GA22254@ff.dom.local>
     [not found] ` <20070821093103.3c097d4a.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
2007-08-21 17:35   ` RFC: drop support for gcc < 4.0 Adrian Bunk
2007-08-21 17:54     ` Russell King
2007-08-21 18:14       ` Kyle McMartin
2007-08-21 18:29       ` Adrian Bunk
2007-08-22  5:48         ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-08-21 18:25     ` Chris Wedgwood
2007-08-21 20:41       ` Glauber de Oliveira Costa
2007-08-21 20:56         ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-08-21 21:01           ` Glauber de Oliveira Costa
2007-08-22  6:59         ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2007-08-22 18:15         ` Ralf Baechle
2007-08-21 19:19     ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-21 19:54       ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2007-08-21 20:07         ` [RFC][PATCH] introduce TASK_SIZE_OF() for all arches Matthew Wilcox
2007-08-21 20:08         ` RFC: drop support for gcc < 4.0 Linus Torvalds
2007-08-21 20:21           ` Adrian Bunk
2007-08-21 20:32             ` Linus Torvalds
2007-08-22  7:36               ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-08-21 20:49             ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-08-21 21:21               ` Adrian Bunk
2007-08-21 21:49                 ` James Bottomley
2007-08-21 22:09                   ` Adrian Bunk
2007-08-22  0:08                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-08-22  6:07                   ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-08-21 21:41     ` Oliver Pinter
2007-08-22  7:57       ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-08-22  8:08         ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-08-22  8:10           ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-08-22  8:42             ` Michal Piotrowski
2007-08-22  8:56             ` Jarek Poplawski
2007-08-22  8:48         ` Martin Michlmayr

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070821195433.GE30705@stusta.de \
    --to=bunk@kernel.org \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=jarkao2@o2.pl \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).