Re: [PATCH] Support gcc 6 for building

[Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>]

On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 17:56 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 09:57:48AM +0200, Michal Marek wrote:
> > On 2015-04-15 21:45, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > gcc recently switched to a new version number scheme, where every version
> > > gets a new major version number. The current version is 5.x, the next 6.x, etc.
> > > 
> > > The gcc git repository trunk branch just switched to report 6.x for the next
> > > major release.
> > > 
> > > This breaks the way Linux selects compiler-gccX.h based on the major
> > > version. Every new version would require adding a new compiler-gccX.h file,
> > > which wouldn't really scale.
> > > 
> > > Let's assume that future gccs are fairly compatible (they are unlikely
> > > to break anything Linux is relying on). So we can just keep using
> > > compiler-gcc5.h, and select any specific differences with #if.
> > 
> > Good idea. With the new scheme, we could also merge back compiler-gcc5.h
> > and compiler-gcc4.h. The only difference is the KASAN_ABI_VERSION define.
> 
> Would be fine too. Are you doing that, or should I send a patch?

As compiler-gcc3.h is trivial, what about integrating
the whole thing into a single file and get rid of the
compiler-gcc<version>.h files?

That would deduplicate the __must_check and __used macros.

I added Sasha Levin to the cc's as he was the only
complainant the first time I suggested this.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/4/675