Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Rainer Orth writes: > Uros Bizjak writes: > >> It looks to me that one part was left in libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c: >> >> #if !defined __x86_64__ && defined __sun__ && defined __svr4__ >> #include >> #include >> ... >> #endif > > Right, missed it because it carried no Solaris 9 comment. I'll remove > it after a round of testing. Here's what I installed after successful bootstraps on i386-pc-solaris2.1[01]. Rainer 2014-04-23 Rainer Orth * config/i386/crtfastmath.c [!__x86_64__ && __sun__ && __svr4__] (sigill_caught, sigill_hdlr): Remove. # HG changeset patch # Parent 150c9610f7b0bfa684db0601a5f026e13ed1d30e Remove SSE execution test in crtfastmath.c diff --git a/libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c b/libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c --- a/libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c +++ b/libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c @@ -31,26 +31,6 @@ #include "cpuid.h" #endif -#if !defined __x86_64__ && defined __sun__ && defined __svr4__ -#include -#include - -static volatile sig_atomic_t sigill_caught; - -static void -sigill_hdlr (int sig __attribute((unused)), - siginfo_t *sip __attribute__((unused)), - ucontext_t *ucp) -{ - sigill_caught = 1; - /* Set PC to the instruction after the faulting one to skip over it, - otherwise we enter an infinite loop. 3 is the size of the movaps - instruction. */ - ucp->uc_mcontext.gregs[EIP] += 3; - setcontext (ucp); -} -#endif - static void __attribute__((constructor)) #ifndef __x86_64__ /* The i386 ABI only requires 4-byte stack alignment, so this is necessary -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Uros Bizjak writes: > It looks to me that one part was left in libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c: > > #if !defined __x86_64__ && defined __sun__ && defined __svr4__ > #include > #include > ... > #endif Right, missed it because it carried no Solaris 9 comment. I'll remove it after a round of testing. Thanks. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Uros Bizjak writes: > >> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Rainer Orth >> wrote: >>> Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete >>> Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under >>> my Solaris maintainership. >>> >>> A couple of questions, though: >>> >>> * Uros: I'm removing all sse_os_support() checks from the testsuite. >>> Solaris 9 was the only consumer, so it seems best to do away with it. >> >> This is OK, but please leave sse-os-check.h (and corresponding >> sse_os_support calls) in the testsuite. Just remove the Solaris 9 >> specific code from sse-os-check.h and always return 1, perhaps with >> the comment that all currently supported OSes support SSE >> instructions. > > Here's the final patch I've checked in, incorporating all review > comments. I've left out the libgo (already checked in by Ian) and > classpath parts. It looks to me that one part was left in libgcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c: #if !defined __x86_64__ && defined __sun__ && defined __svr4__ #include #include ... #endif
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Andrew Hughes writes: > - Original Message - >> On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 09:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: >> > On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> > > * I'm removing the check from classpath. Again, I'm >> > > uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were >> > > merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers. >> > >> > We should not diverge from GNU Classpath unless there is a strong reason >> > to do so. >> >> I think the configure check is mostly harmless, but wouldn't be opposed >> removing it. It really seems to have been added explicitly for Solaris >> 9, which is probably really dead by now. Andrew Hughes, you added it >> back in 2008. Are you still using/building on any Solaris 9 setups? >> > > I vaguely remember adding it. I was building on the university's Solaris 9 > machines at the time. They've long since replaced them with GNU/Linux machines > and I've been at Red Hat for over five years, so those days are long gone :) > > I have some Freetype fixes to push to Classpath as well, so I'll fix this too > and look at merging to gcj in the not-too-distant future. I think it's long > overdue. Ideally, the change should be left out of this patch, so as to avoid > conflicts. Based on the other Andrew's comment and the knowledge that classpath (like libgo) lives upstream, I didn't commit that part with the rest of the patch. Thanks. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
- Original Message - > On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 09:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > > > * I'm removing the check from classpath. Again, I'm > > > uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were > > > merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers. > > > > We should not diverge from GNU Classpath unless there is a strong reason > > to do so. > > I think the configure check is mostly harmless, but wouldn't be opposed > removing it. It really seems to have been added explicitly for Solaris > 9, which is probably really dead by now. Andrew Hughes, you added it > back in 2008. Are you still using/building on any Solaris 9 setups? > I vaguely remember adding it. I was building on the university's Solaris 9 machines at the time. They've long since replaced them with GNU/Linux machines and I've been at Red Hat for over five years, so those days are long gone :) I have some Freetype fixes to push to Classpath as well, so I'll fix this too and look at merging to gcj in the not-too-distant future. I think it's long overdue. Ideally, the change should be left out of this patch, so as to avoid conflicts. > Cheers, > > Mark > > Thanks, -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
David Edelsohn writes: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Rainer Orth > wrote: > David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX? >>> >>> AIX TLS needs -pthread command line option. >> >> Understood, but is the reason given in that comment (__tls_get_addr in >> libthread) correct? Seems like a Solaris 9 implementation detail to me. > > It's not a Solaris 9 implementation detail. That is why I wrote "Same > for AIX." in the comment. Ok, thanks for the confirmation. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: >>> David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX? >> >> AIX TLS needs -pthread command line option. > > Understood, but is the reason given in that comment (__tls_get_addr in > libthread) correct? Seems like a Solaris 9 implementation detail to me. It's not a Solaris 9 implementation detail. That is why I wrote "Same for AIX." in the comment. Thanks, David
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
David Edelsohn writes: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rainer Orth > wrote: >> Rainer Orth writes: >> >>> Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete >>> Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under >>> my Solaris maintainership. >>> >>> A couple of questions, though: >>> >>> * David: In target-supports.exp (add_options_for_tls), the comment needs >>> to be updated with Solaris 9 support gone. Is it completely accurate >>> for AIX, even wrt. __tls_get_addr/___tls_get_addr? >> >> David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX? > > AIX TLS needs -pthread command line option. Understood, but is the reason given in that comment (__tls_get_addr in libthread) correct? Seems like a Solaris 9 implementation detail to me. Thanks. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Rainer Orth writes: > >> Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete >> Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under >> my Solaris maintainership. >> >> A couple of questions, though: >> >> * David: In target-supports.exp (add_options_for_tls), the comment needs >> to be updated with Solaris 9 support gone. Is it completely accurate >> for AIX, even wrt. __tls_get_addr/___tls_get_addr? > > David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX? AIX TLS needs -pthread command line option. Thanks, David
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On Sat, 2014-04-19 at 09:03 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > > * I'm removing the check from classpath. Again, I'm > > uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were > > merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers. > > We should not diverge from GNU Classpath unless there is a strong reason > to do so. I think the configure check is mostly harmless, but wouldn't be opposed removing it. It really seems to have been added explicitly for Solaris 9, which is probably really dead by now. Andrew Hughes, you added it back in 2008. Are you still using/building on any Solaris 9 setups? Cheers, Mark
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Andrew Haley writes: > On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> * I'm removing the check from classpath. Again, I'm >> uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were >> merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers. > > We should not diverge from GNU Classpath unless there is a strong reason > to do so. I never meant to suggest that. With Solaris 9 support gone from from gcc, the only consumer of this code fragment is gone, and this seems a good opportunity to get rid of this obsolete code. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Rainer Orth writes: > Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete > Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under > my Solaris maintainership. > > A couple of questions, though: > > * David: In target-supports.exp (add_options_for_tls), the comment needs > to be updated with Solaris 9 support gone. Is it completely accurate > for AIX, even wrt. __tls_get_addr/___tls_get_addr? David, could you please review this comment for correctness on AIX? Thanks. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Bruce Korb writes: > On 04/16/14 04:16, Rainer Orth wrote: >> I've already verified that trunk fails to build no sparc-sun-solaris2.9 >> and i386-pc-solaris2.9. Bootstraps on {i386,sparc}-*-solaris2.{10,11} >> (and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for good measure) are in progress. I'll >> verify that there are no unexpected fixincludes changes and differences >> in gcc configure results. > > >> fixincludes: >> * inclhack.def (math_exception): Bypass on *-*-solaris2.1[0-9]*. >> (solaris_int_types): Remove. >> (solaris_longjmp_noreturn): Remove. >> (solaris_mutex_init_2): Remove. >> (solaris_once_init_2): Remove. >> (solaris_sys_va_list): Remove. >> * fixincl.x: Regenerate. >> * tests/base/iso/setjmp_iso.h: Remove. >> * tests/base/pthread.h [SOLARIS_MUTEX_INIT_2_CHECK]: Remove. >> [SOLARIS_ONCE_INIT_2_CHECK]: Remove. >> * tests/base/sys/int_types.h: Remove. >> * tests/base/sys/va_list.h: Remove. > > Removing dinkleberry fixes by the platform maintainer always has my approval. > :) Thanks. I've had to update once of the testcases which was modified by two different fixes. High time to integrate fixincludes make check with the testsuite so this isn't so easily overlooked... Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
2.1[0-9]*. (solaris_int_types): Remove. (solaris_longjmp_noreturn): Remove. (solaris_mutex_init_2): Remove. (solaris_once_init_2): Remove. (solaris_sys_va_list): Remove. * fixincl.x: Regenerate. * tests/base/iso/setjmp_iso.h: Remove. * tests/base/pthread.h [SOLARIS_MUTEX_INIT_2_CHECK]: Remove. [SOLARIS_ONCE_INIT_1_CHECK]: Remove wrapping done by solaris_once_init_2. [SOLARIS_ONCE_INIT_2_CHECK]: Remove. * tests/base/sys/int_types.h: Remove. * tests/base/sys/va_list.h: Remove. contrib: * config-list.mk (LIST): Remove sparc-sun-solaris2.9, i686-solaris2.9. # HG changeset patch # Parent 38d681ec07686a092be2c779b81b171605c2db1c Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support diff --git a/contrib/config-list.mk b/contrib/config-list.mk --- a/contrib/config-list.mk +++ b/contrib/config-list.mk @@ -75,7 +75,6 @@ LIST = aarch64-elf aarch64-linux-gnu \ x86_64-knetbsd-gnu x86_64-w64-mingw32 \ x86_64-mingw32OPT-enable-sjlj-exceptions=yes xstormy16-elf xtensa-elf \ xtensa-linux \ - sparc-sun-solaris2.9OPT-enable-obsolete i686-solaris2.9OPT-enable-obsolete \ i686-interix3OPT-enable-obsolete score-elfOPT-enable-obsolete LOGFILES = $(patsubst %,log/%-make.out,$(LIST)) diff --git a/fixincludes/inclhack.def b/fixincludes/inclhack.def --- a/fixincludes/inclhack.def +++ b/fixincludes/inclhack.def @@ -2767,6 +2767,9 @@ fix = { */ bypass= 'We have a problem when using C\+\+|for C\+\+, ' '_[a-z0-9A-Z_]+_exception; for C, exception'; +/* The Solaris 10 headers already get this right. */ +mach = '*-*-solaris2.1[0-9]*'; +not_machine = true; c_fix = wrap; c_fix_arg = "#ifdef __cplusplus\n" @@ -3407,42 +3410,6 @@ fix = { }; /* - * Sun Solaris up to 9 has a version of sys/int_types.h that forbids use - * of Standard C99 64-bit types in 32-bit mode. - */ -fix = { -hackname = solaris_int_types; -select= "__STDC__ - 0 == 0"; -bypass= "_LONGLONG_TYPE"; -files = sys/int_types.h; -c_fix = format; -c_fix_arg = -"(defined(_STDC_C99) || !defined(_STRICT_STDC) || defined(__GNUC__))"; -test_text = -"#if __STDC__ - 0 == 0 && !defined(_NO_LONGLONG)\n" -"typedef long long int64_t;\n" -"#endif\n\n" -"#if defined(_LP64) || (__STDC__ - 0 == 0 && !defined(_NO_LONGLONG))\n" -"typedef int64_t intmax_t;\n" -"#endif"; -}; - -/* - * Before Solaris 10, doesn't mark longjump noreturn. - */ -fix = { -hackname = solaris_longjmp_noreturn; -mach = "*-*-solaris2*"; -files = "iso/setjmp_iso.h"; -bypass= "__NORETURN"; -select= "(.*longjmp\\(jmp_buf.*[^)]+\\));"; -c_fix = format; -c_fix_arg = "%1 __attribute__ ((__noreturn__));"; - -test_text = "extern void longjmp(jmp_buf, int);"; -}; - -/* * Sun Solaris 10 defines several C99 math macros in terms of * builtins specific to the Studio compiler, in particular not * compatible with the GNU compiler. @@ -3595,44 +3562,6 @@ fix = { }; /* - * Sun Solaris defines PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER with a trailing - * "0" for the last field of the pthread_mutex_t structure, which is - * of type upad64_t, which itself is typedef'd to int64_t, but with - * __STDC__ defined (e.g. by -ansi) it is a union. So change the - * initializer to "{0}" instead - */ -fix = { -hackname = solaris_mutex_init_2; -select = '@\(#\)pthread.h' "[ \t]+1.[0-9]+[ \t]+[0-9/]+ SMI"; -files = pthread.h; -/* - * On Solaris 10, this fix is unnecessary because upad64_t is - * always defined correctly regardless of the definition of the - * __STDC__ macro. The first "mach" pattern matches up to - * solaris9. The second "mach" pattern will not match any two (or - * more) digit solaris version, but it will match e.g. 2.5.1. - */ -mach = '*-*-solaris2.[0-9]', '*-*-solaris2.[0-9][!0-9]*'; -c_fix = format; -c_fix_arg = "#if __STDC__ - 0 == 0 && !defined(_NO_LONGLONG)\n" -"%0\n" -"#else\n" -"%1, {0}}%4\n" -"#endif"; -c_fix_arg = "(^#define[ \t]+PTHREAD_(MUTEX|COND)_INITIALIZER[ \t]+" -"(|/\*.*\*/[ \t]*\n[ \t]*)\\{.*)" -",[ \t]*0\\}" "(|[ \t].*)$"; -test_text = -'#ident "@(#)pthread.h 1.26 98/04/12 SMI"'"\n" -"#define PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER\t{{{0},0}, {{{0}}}, 0}\n" -"#define PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER\t{{{0}, 0}, 0}\t/* DEFAULTCV */\n" -"#d
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Eric Botcazou writes: >> But for the Solaris 9 stuff, it crystal clear that this cannot occur on >> Solaris 10 and up (no single-threaded case anymore since libthread.so.1 >> has been folded into libc.so.1). Ok to remove this part? > > OK for the "Solaris 9 - single-threaded" part. Thanks. I've updated the comments on the Solaris 9 multi-threaded sections with my findings so they aren't forgotten. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On 04/16/14 04:16, Rainer Orth wrote: I've already verified that trunk fails to build no sparc-sun-solaris2.9 and i386-pc-solaris2.9. Bootstraps on {i386,sparc}-*-solaris2.{10,11} (and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu for good measure) are in progress. I'll verify that there are no unexpected fixincludes changes and differences in gcc configure results. fixincludes: * inclhack.def (math_exception): Bypass on *-*-solaris2.1[0-9]*. (solaris_int_types): Remove. (solaris_longjmp_noreturn): Remove. (solaris_mutex_init_2): Remove. (solaris_once_init_2): Remove. (solaris_sys_va_list): Remove. * fixincl.x: Regenerate. * tests/base/iso/setjmp_iso.h: Remove. * tests/base/pthread.h [SOLARIS_MUTEX_INIT_2_CHECK]: Remove. [SOLARIS_ONCE_INIT_2_CHECK]: Remove. * tests/base/sys/int_types.h: Remove. * tests/base/sys/va_list.h: Remove. Removing dinkleberry fixes by the platform maintainer always has my approval. :)
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On 04/16/2014 12:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > * I'm removing the check from classpath. Again, I'm > uncertain if this is desirable. In the past, classpath changes were > merged upstream by one of the libjava maintainers. We should not diverge from GNU Classpath unless there is a strong reason to do so. Andrew.
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
> But for the Solaris 9 stuff, it crystal clear that this cannot occur on > Solaris 10 and up (no single-threaded case anymore since libthread.so.1 > has been folded into libc.so.1). Ok to remove this part? OK for the "Solaris 9 - single-threaded" part. -- Eric Botcazou
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Uros Bizjak writes: > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Rainer Orth > wrote: >> Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete >> Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under >> my Solaris maintainership. >> >> A couple of questions, though: >> >> * Uros: I'm removing all sse_os_support() checks from the testsuite. >> Solaris 9 was the only consumer, so it seems best to do away with it. > > This is OK, but please leave sse-os-check.h (and corresponding > sse_os_support calls) in the testsuite. Just remove the Solaris 9 > specific code from sse-os-check.h and always return 1, perhaps with > the comment that all currently supported OSes support SSE > instructions. Done. I'll repost the final patch once another round of testing has completed. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Ian Lance Taylor writes: > >> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Rainer Orth >> wrote: >>> >>> * Ian: I've removed Solaris 8 and 9 support from libgo. I'm uncertain >>> if you want this or rather keep that support for the 4.[789] branches? >> >> I want it. I don't try to maintain exact copies of older GCC >> branches. >> >> Your patch appears separable, and I can commit the libgo part. Let me >> know when I should do so. > > Go ahead whenever you like. It's at most a few days until I commit the > rest, Solaris 9 isn't supposed to work on mainline any longer, and the > libgo part is independent of the rest. > > I've already separated the libgo and classpath parts from my main patch. Thanks. Committed attached patch to mainline. Ian diff -r 98547f162e12 libgo/configure.ac --- a/libgo/configure.ac Thu Apr 10 09:25:24 2014 -0700 +++ b/libgo/configure.ac Wed Apr 16 13:22:16 2014 -0700 @@ -316,11 +316,6 @@ # msghdr in . OSCFLAGS="$OSCFLAGS -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500" ;; -*-*-solaris2.[[89]]) - # Solaris 8/9 need this so struct msghdr gets the msg_control - # etc. fields in (_XPG4_2). - OSCFLAGS="$OSCFLAGS -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500 -D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED -D__EXTENSIONS__" - ;; *-*-solaris2.1[[01]]) # Solaris 10+ needs this so struct msghdr gets the msg_control # etc. fields in (_XPG4_2). _XOPEN_SOURCE=600 as @@ -662,21 +657,6 @@ [Define to 1 if defines struct exception]) fi -dnl Check if makecontext expects the uc_stack member of ucontext to point -dnl to the top of the stack. -case "$target" in - sparc*-*-solaris2.[[89]]*) -libgo_cv_lib_makecontext_stack_top=yes -;; - *) -libgo_cv_lib_makecontext_stack_top=no -;; -esac -if test "$libgo_cv_lib_makecontext_stack_top" = "yes"; then - AC_DEFINE(MAKECONTEXT_STACK_TOP, 1, - [Define if makecontext expects top of stack in uc_stack.]) -fi - dnl See whether setcontext changes the value of TLS variables. AC_CACHE_CHECK([whether setcontext clobbers TLS variables], [libgo_cv_lib_setcontext_clobbers_tls], diff -r 98547f162e12 libgo/go/math/ldexp.go --- a/libgo/go/math/ldexp.go Thu Apr 10 09:25:24 2014 -0700 +++ b/libgo/go/math/ldexp.go Wed Apr 16 13:22:16 2014 -0700 @@ -17,16 +17,6 @@ func Ldexp(frac float64, exp int) float64 { r := libc_ldexp(frac, exp) - - // Work around a bug in the implementation of ldexp on Solaris - // 9. If multiplying a negative number by 2 raised to a - // negative exponent underflows, we want to return negative - // zero, but the Solaris 9 implementation returns positive - // zero. This workaround can be removed when and if we no - // longer care about Solaris 9. - if r == 0 && frac < 0 && exp < 0 { - r = Copysign(0, frac) - } return r } diff -r 98547f162e12 libgo/runtime/proc.c --- a/libgo/runtime/proc.c Thu Apr 10 09:25:24 2014 -0700 +++ b/libgo/runtime/proc.c Wed Apr 16 13:22:16 2014 -0700 @@ -1212,9 +1212,6 @@ // here we need to set up the context for g0. getcontext(&mp->g0->context); mp->g0->context.uc_stack.ss_sp = g0_sp; -#ifdef MAKECONTEXT_STACK_TOP - mp->g0->context.uc_stack.ss_sp += g0_spsize; -#endif mp->g0->context.uc_stack.ss_size = g0_spsize; makecontext(&mp->g0->context, kickoff, 0);
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Ian Lance Taylor writes: > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Rainer Orth > wrote: >> >> * Ian: I've removed Solaris 8 and 9 support from libgo. I'm uncertain >> if you want this or rather keep that support for the 4.[789] branches? > > I want it. I don't try to maintain exact copies of older GCC > branches. > > Your patch appears separable, and I can commit the libgo part. Let me > know when I should do so. Go ahead whenever you like. It's at most a few days until I commit the rest, Solaris 9 isn't supposed to work on mainline any longer, and the libgo part is independent of the rest. I've already separated the libgo and classpath parts from my main patch. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > > * Ian: I've removed Solaris 8 and 9 support from libgo. I'm uncertain > if you want this or rather keep that support for the 4.[789] branches? I want it. I don't try to maintain exact copies of older GCC branches. Your patch appears separable, and I can commit the libgo part. Let me know when I should do so. Ian
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Rainer Orth wrote: > Now that 4.9 has branched, it's time to actually remove the obsolete > Solaris 9 configuration. Most of this is just legwork and falls under > my Solaris maintainership. > > A couple of questions, though: > > * Uros: I'm removing all sse_os_support() checks from the testsuite. > Solaris 9 was the only consumer, so it seems best to do away with it. This is OK, but please leave sse-os-check.h (and corresponding sse_os_support calls) in the testsuite. Just remove the Solaris 9 specific code from sse-os-check.h and always return 1, perhaps with the comment that all currently supported OSes support SSE instructions. Uros.
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
Eric Botcazou writes: >> * Eric: In libgcc/config/sparc/sol2-unwind.h, I've removed the Solaris 9 >> cases after verifying that the cuh_pattern's used there only occur in >> Solaris 9 (from FCS to the latest libthread.so.1 patch), but not even >> in Solaris 10 FCS. >> >> For Solaris 10, do you have any more details on when the 2-frame case >> occurs? I've found that patch submission >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg02370.html >> >> but no details on what S10 update/patch this happens with. > > Let's not touch libgcc/config/sparc/sol2-unwind.h, the small gain is not > worth > the potential trouble IMO. Maybe not for the 2-frame vs. 3-frame case, though it would still be good to know the exact circumstances. But for the Solaris 9 stuff, it crystal clear that this cannot occur on Solaris 10 and up (no single-threaded case anymore since libthread.so.1 has been folded into libc.so.1). Ok to remove this part? Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
Re: Remove obsolete Solaris 9 support
> * Eric: In libgcc/config/sparc/sol2-unwind.h, I've removed the Solaris 9 > cases after verifying that the cuh_pattern's used there only occur in > Solaris 9 (from FCS to the latest libthread.so.1 patch), but not even > in Solaris 10 FCS. > > For Solaris 10, do you have any more details on when the 2-frame case > occurs? I've found that patch submission > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg02370.html > > but no details on what S10 update/patch this happens with. Let's not touch libgcc/config/sparc/sol2-unwind.h, the small gain is not worth the potential trouble IMO. -- Eric Botcazou