Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc: Require gcc 4.0 on 64-bit
On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:42 PM, Anton Blanchard wrote: Older versions of gcc had issues with using -maltivec together with -mcpu of a non altivec capable CPU. We work around it by specifying -mcpu=970, but the logic is complicated. In preparation for adding more -mcpu targets, remove the workaround and just require gcc 4.0 for 64-bit builds. Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard an...@samba.org --- 4.0 came out in 2005 and the gcc on RHEL5 and SLES10 looks to be 4.1. I highly doubt a ppc64 kernel will build these days on either RHEL4 or SLES9. Anything else we have to worry about? There are probably embedded customers that might utilize older compilers, so this concerns me a little. - k ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc: Require gcc 4.0 on 64-bit
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 09:28 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:42 PM, Anton Blanchard wrote: Older versions of gcc had issues with using -maltivec together with -mcpu of a non altivec capable CPU. We work around it by specifying -mcpu=970, but the logic is complicated. In preparation for adding more -mcpu targets, remove the workaround and just require gcc 4.0 for 64-bit builds. Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard an...@samba.org --- 4.0 came out in 2005 and the gcc on RHEL5 and SLES10 looks to be 4.1. I highly doubt a ppc64 kernel will build these days on either RHEL4 or SLES9. Anything else we have to worry about? There are probably embedded customers that might utilize older compilers, so this concerns me a little. For 64-bit ? I doubt it ... Cheers, Ben. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
[PATCH 1/4] powerpc: Require gcc 4.0 on 64-bit
Older versions of gcc had issues with using -maltivec together with -mcpu of a non altivec capable CPU. We work around it by specifying -mcpu=970, but the logic is complicated. In preparation for adding more -mcpu targets, remove the workaround and just require gcc 4.0 for 64-bit builds. Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard an...@samba.org --- 4.0 came out in 2005 and the gcc on RHEL5 and SLES10 looks to be 4.1. I highly doubt a ppc64 kernel will build these days on either RHEL4 or SLES9. Anything else we have to worry about? Index: linux-build/arch/powerpc/Makefile === --- linux-build.orig/arch/powerpc/Makefile 2012-04-18 11:59:31.444220933 +1000 +++ linux-build/arch/powerpc/Makefile 2012-04-18 11:59:58.860721391 +1000 @@ -234,10 +234,11 @@ archprepare: checkbin # Use the file '.tmp_gas_check' for binutils tests, as gas won't output # to stdout and these checks are run even on install targets. TOUT := .tmp_gas_check -# Ensure this is binutils 2.12.1 (or 2.12.90.0.7) or later for altivec -# instructions. -# gcc-3.4 and binutils-2.14 are a fatal combination. +# Check gcc and binutils versions: +# - gcc-3.4 and binutils-2.14 are a fatal combination +# - Require gcc 4.0 or above on 64-bit +# - gcc-4.2.0 has issues compiling modules on 64-bit checkbin: @if test $(call cc-version) = 0304 ; then \ if ! /bin/echo mftb 5 | $(AS) -v -mppc -many -o $(TOUT) /dev/null 21 ; then \ @@ -247,6 +248,12 @@ checkbin: false; \ fi ; \ fi + @if test $(call cc-version) -lt 0400 \ +test x${CONFIG_PPC64} = xy ; then \ +echo -n Sorry, GCC v4.0 or above is required to build ; \ +echo the 64-bit powerpc kernel. ; \ +false ; \ +fi @if test $(call cc-fullversion) = 040200 \ test x${CONFIG_MODULES}${CONFIG_PPC64} = xyy ; then \ echo -n '*** GCC-4.2.0 cannot compile the 64-bit powerpc ' ; \ ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev