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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA60C433ED for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 08:49:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3B25613C9 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 08:49:14 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A3B25613C9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:53566 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lZrUv-00064i-K6 for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:49:13 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60246) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lZrTR-0004wH-J5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:47:45 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:51822) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lZrTJ-0000EV-Mj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:47:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1619167652; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=d6MBo1pY9dMO7T6vOhGV4F7UfD/0gGPlSzud8GLRegA=; b=DNrM5GcUYxpzvJ1xcxZLlRPiOcV731lfWO8JIMrNYS3D2HeZRM9L4J8VRxWT3AKka/grQh jaliLiFXrdU0qIeJU8lCIULh6BDw9leOtvryDungq2PUrDt7bz/iOA1oZdA/EMkFLkuQqs PLGpXoKSPhX2Y6XZTidQS5JPywRJzjk= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-554-KaJ1WFcMNSm0m2QZM8G5uA-1; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 04:47:20 -0400 X-MC-Unique: KaJ1WFcMNSm0m2QZM8G5uA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEC6E107ACCA; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 08:47:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (ovpn-112-17.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.17]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 021953A47; Fri, 23 Apr 2021 08:47:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:47:12 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Thomas Huth Subject: Re: Compiling the s390-ccw bios with clang (was: Re: s390-ccw: warning: writing 1 byte into a region of size 0) Message-ID: References: <20210422155238.kak7tl3xnup5vod7@steredhat> <20210423064001.fjouibdcwadtgijy@steredhat> <8abfb851-a5d2-8608-fe96-2eb3014adb96@redhat.com> <20210423100708.262eeaf0.cohuck@redhat.com> <856dfa3f-e7ee-b88e-47e4-96d39dba20c3@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <856dfa3f-e7ee-b88e-47e4-96d39dba20c3@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/2.0.5 (2021-01-21) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=berrange@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Cc: Peter Maydell , Janosch Frank , Cornelia Huck , Richard Henderson , qemu-devel , Christian Borntraeger , qemu-s390x , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , Stefano Garzarella Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 10:22:28AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 23/04/2021 10.07, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 09:57:08 +0200 > > Thomas Huth wrote: > > > > > On 23/04/2021 08.52, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > [...] > > > > We can of course discuss if we compile the BIOS for z10 instead of z900. TCG > > > > in the mean time can handle up to z13 and z10 is now also 13 years old. > > > > > > I'd really like to see us supporting Clang in the s390-ccw bios, too, since > > > it provides additional useful compiler warnings ... but switching the -mz900 > > > to -mz10 here also means that we could not boot VMs anymore that use a CPU > > > that is older than the z10... > > > > We could still boot a kernel/initrd directly, couldn't we? > > Yes, but that will certainly require some documentation effort to make it > clear to the users that they need to use "-kernel" in case they want to run > an older guest... > > > > Is anybody still using such old CPUs? Should we maybe deprecate all CPUs > > > that are older than the z10 in QEMU? Alternatively, we could try to detect > > > Clang in the Makefile, and only use -mz10 in that case and continue to use > > > -mz900 in the other case...? > > > > So, the issue with clang is that it compiles to at least a z10, right? > > Right, Clang does not support anything that is older than a z10. IIUC, according to wikipedia - z10 series was introduced in 2008 - z900 series was introduced in 2000 Even the z10 is well older than the oldest OS platform we support. Though I presume people keep mainframes deployed for longer than commodity x86 hardware, it doesn't seem too unreasonable to say z10 is the oldest we'll support. IIUC, downstreams like RHEL already require even newer hadware than z10 Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|