From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 27 19:38:10 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: amd64@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ACB5DD8; Mon, 27 May 2013 19:38:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dim@FreeBSD.org) Received: from tensor.andric.com (tensor.andric.com [IPv6:2001:7b8:3a7:1:2d0:b7ff:fea0:8c26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00917841; Mon, 27 May 2013 19:38:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2001:7b8:3a7::ddfd:5c8d:86c3:f815] (unknown [IPv6:2001:7b8:3a7:0:ddfd:5c8d:86c3:f815]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tensor.andric.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 50A075C44; Mon, 27 May 2013 21:38:03 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) Subject: Re: [CFT] gcc: support for barcelona From: Dimitry Andric In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 21:38:01 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4BD4D414-8281-4127-A520-565CF28FF5E5@FreeBSD.org> References: <51A38CBD.6000702@FreeBSD.org> To: Rui Paulo X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 27 May 2013 22:54:36 +0000 Cc: amd64@FreeBSD.org, toolchain@FreeBSD.org, Pedro Giffuni X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 19:38:10 -0000 On May 27, 2013, at 21:12, Rui Paulo wrote: > On 27 May 2013, at 09:41, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >> Almost a year ago I tried to bring in the support for AMD's barcelona >> chipset into our gcc. This actually filled a lot of holes in that = were left >> when similar intel support was brought in. >>=20 >> Unfortunately I had to revert rapidly such support as it broke = building >> some C++ ports even when it was not being used. >>=20 >> jkim@ did some cleanup of the support and the patch has been >> gathering rust here: >>=20 >> http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/reworked-r236962-3.diff >>=20 >> The patch still applies cleanly and there is a good chance it will = work >> since there have been other fixes merged since the last time. >>=20 >> I did some basic testing and so far it works for me but I don't have >> the specific chipset. Additional testing would be welcome. >=20 > I have to question the general direction of this work. We switched to = Clang as the default compiler for i386/amd64 some months ago and now = you're working on improving our base GCC especially for amd64? I don't = really understand how useful this is. It doesn't strike me as a good = idea to see people working on things that will eventually be replaced / = removed. It is probably a better use of time to work on getting the tree to build with an out-of-tree gcc 4.7 or 4.8 instead. Why spend more effort on a completely dead branch of gcc? Newer gcc's have better code generation, support for more modern CPUs, and better diagnostics (including even those controversial carets ;-). That said, if it is a particular itch somebody wants to scratch, I see no reason not to, as long as it doesn't break anything else... -Dimitry