From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752645Ab0ESXLO (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 May 2010 19:11:14 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:14170 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751881Ab0ESXLM (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 May 2010 19:11:12 -0400 Message-ID: <4BF46FFE.1080903@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 20:10:54 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090609) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" CC: Eric Dumazet , mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, tglx@linutronix.de, avi@redhat.com, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Does anyone care about gcc 3.x support for x86 anymore? References: <1273135546-29690-2-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <1274213443.2485.3.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4BF2FF26.9050701@zytor.com> <1274217067.2485.9.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4BF308E9.4040809@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <4BF308E9.4040809@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Recently, we have seen an increasing number of problems with gcc 3.4 on > x86; mostly due to poor constant propagation producing not just bad code > but failing to properly eliminate what should be dead code. I don't see any problem, as, if people are using gcc3, they are probably not interested on the bleeding edge kernel. However, if the problems are just performance/dead code removal, I would just add a big warning if someone tries to compile x86 with it. I don't like very much the idea of having different minimum gcc requirements for each architecture, except if gcc is producing a broken code. Currently,Documentation/Changes list just a common minimal list for everything - although the text describing gcc say that the "version requirements" may vary for each CPU type. -- Cheers, Mauro