Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 09:00:03 +0100 From: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> To: Navdeep Parhar <np@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>, "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> Subject: Re: svn commit: r276485 - in head/sys: conf dev/cxgbe modules/cxgbe/if_cxgbe Message-ID: <98838DA6-1969-4764-83DE-71F7BB568E23@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20150121055329.GB3307@ox> References: <201412312319.sBVNJHca031041@svn.freebsd.org> <CA%2BhQ2%2Bh29RObCONCd8Nu_W92CnJ9jHMZdRBqiU9hu78D3SwUDA@mail.gmail.com> <20150106203344.GB26068@ox> <54BEE07A.3070207@FreeBSD.org> <54BEE305.6020905@FreeBSD.org> <54BEF7CF.9030505@FreeBSD.org> <20150121021905.GA73548@FreeBSD.org> <CAJ-VmokL2jq_Kh2CF30G%2BEk63Gab316i6atEN_7gYA8gzDEYNw@mail.gmail.com> <54BF1EB0.2080901@FreeBSD.org> <20150121055329.GB3307@ox>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --]
On 21 Jan 2015, at 06:53, Navdeep Parhar <np@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:36:16PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>
>> On 01/20/15 22:06, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>> On 20 January 2015 at 18:19, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 07:50:23PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>> But the fix is rather ugly, isn't it? I would personally prefer to just
>>>>> kill the older gcc but in the meantime updating it so that it behaves
>>>>> like the updated gcc/clang would be better. IMHO.
>>>> Seconded. Putting extra harness on the code to avoid bugs in the compiler
>>>> that were actually fixed upsteam is totally bogus.
>>> Right, but:
>>>
>>> * not all of us work on compilers;
>>> * not all of us want to currently be working on compilers;
>>> * some of us have to use the gcc that's in tree;
>>> * .. and apparently updating that gcc to something > 4.2 is verboten.
>>
>> The external toolchain can't be that bad(?).
>>
>>> So if someone wants to help Navdeep by backporting those options,
>>
>> Hmm .. didn't I post a patch?
>>
>>> please do. I bet he'd love the help.
>>>
>> Ugh he doesn't and TBH, I don't care enough to look for
>> consensus either.
>
> Let's please just move on from this discussion then. I am not familiar
> with gcc internals so I can't vouch for this patch, and gcc is the
> default compiler on platforms that I cannot test. Given that, it would
> be reckless of me to push a gcc patch just to get it to play nice with
> one single file in the tree. High risk, little reward (given that
> -fms-extensions can be applied to just the file in question without
> disturbing anything else in the tree).
Alternatively, just use the ${GCC_MS_EXTENSIONS} Makefile macro, which
I specifically introduced for this issue.
See e.g. sys/modules/ibcore/Makefile for an example.
-Dimitry
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.26
iEYEARECAAYFAlS/XIYACgkQsF6jCi4glqMLNgCfTU7AL+edjlRlCpRA1CDPdFnZ
k4QAni+w/Q/CjcwMiY9RLVLD5NJ3apiD
=wRrZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?98838DA6-1969-4764-83DE-71F7BB568E23>