[Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Chen Gang]

Hello Maintainers:

After google search and check the Linux kernel, H8/300 is dead, and for
gcc-4.9.0 and binutils-2.23.2 still has h8300, do we still need it for
another OS ?

Welcome any suggestions or completions, thanks.


The related information in linux kernel next tree:

  commit d02babe847bf96b82b12cc4e4e90028ac3fac73f
  Author: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
  Date:   Fri Aug 30 06:01:49 2013 -0700
  
      Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture
  
      H8/300 has been dead for several years, and the kernel for it
      has not compiled for ages. Drop support for it.
  
      Cc: Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>
      Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
      Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>


The related information in gcc/binutils:

  We can build h8300 cross-compiler for Linux kernel, successfully, but it has many bugs when building Linux kernel with -Os.
  if we still need h8300 for another OS, is it still valuable to send these bugs to Bugzilla (although it is found under Linux)?


Thanks.
--
Chen Gang

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[nick clifton]

Hi Chen,
> After google search and check the Linux kernel, H8/300 is dead, and for
> gcc-4.9.0 and binutils-2.23.2 still has h8300, do we still need it for
> another OS ?

Yes.

The H8/300 target is still be used by lots of different groups.  Just 
because the Linux kernel no longer supports it, that does not mean that 
the entire toolchain is redundant.

Cheers
   Nick

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Chen Gang]

On 09/17/2013 09:54 PM, nick clifton wrote:
> Hi Chen,
>> After google search and check the Linux kernel, H8/300 is dead, and for
>> gcc-4.9.0 and binutils-2.23.2 still has h8300, do we still need it for
>> another OS ?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> The H8/300 target is still be used by lots of different groups.  Just
> because the Linux kernel no longer supports it, that does not mean that
> the entire toolchain is redundant.
> 

OK, thank you for your information.

After some trying, it proves, I am really a newbie for gcc and binutils.

I try to fix one of issues (already on Bugzilla) within 2013-09-19, it
seems I will be fail (because of my very low efficient analyzing, and
have to do another things too). But I am still continue trying...


Welcome any suggestions or completions, thanks.

> Cheers
>   Nick
> 
> 
> 
> 

Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Chen Gang]

On 09/10/2013 10:19 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/09/2013 07:13 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>> Hello Maintainers:
>>
>> After google search and check the Linux kernel, H8/300 is dead, and for
>> gcc-4.9.0 and binutils-2.23.2 still has h8300, do we still need it for
>> another OS ?
>>
>> Welcome any suggestions or completions, thanks.
>>
>>
>> The related information in linux kernel next tree:
>>
>>    commit d02babe847bf96b82b12cc4e4e90028ac3fac73f
>>    Author: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>>    Date:   Fri Aug 30 06:01:49 2013 -0700
>>
>>        Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture
>>
>>        H8/300 has been dead for several years, and the kernel for it
>>        has not compiled for ages. Drop support for it.
>>
>>        Cc: Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>
>>        Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>>        Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>>
>>
>> The related information in gcc/binutils:
>>
>>    We can build h8300 cross-compiler for Linux kernel, successfully,
>> but it has many bugs when building Linux kernel with -Os.
>>    if we still need h8300 for another OS, is it still valuable to send
>> these bugs to Bugzilla (although it is found under Linux)?
> It is still useful to send code generation bugs for the H8/300 series to
> the GCC folks.
> 

OK, thanks, I will wait for 1-2 days which may get another members'
opinions for discussing.

If no additional opinions, I will report them to Bugzilla, and I should
try to continue 'work' with related members (although I am a newbie for
compiler and binutils programming).

> jeff
> 
> 
> 

Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Michael Schewe]

Hello Maintainers,

if you like to drop h8/300 support in linux kernel, thats OK for me.
But i like to see it still supported in gcc & binutils, at least i have some projects and know companies using this architecture in embedded applications, bare 
metal without OS. These products have lifetime in range of 10...20 years and need toolchain support for software-updates.

Michael

Please note for answers: i am only subscribed to binutils mailing list.

Chen Gang schrieb:
> On 09/10/2013 10:19 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 09/09/2013 07:13 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> Hello Maintainers:
>>>
>>> After google search and check the Linux kernel, H8/300 is dead, and for
>>> gcc-4.9.0 and binutils-2.23.2 still has h8300, do we still need it for
>>> another OS ?
>>>
>>> Welcome any suggestions or completions, thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> The related information in linux kernel next tree:
>>>
>>>     commit d02babe847bf96b82b12cc4e4e90028ac3fac73f
>>>     Author: Guenter Roeck<linux@roeck-us.net>
>>>     Date:   Fri Aug 30 06:01:49 2013 -0700
>>>
>>>         Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture
>>>
>>>         H8/300 has been dead for several years, and the kernel for it
>>>         has not compiled for ages. Drop support for it.
>>>
>>>         Cc: Yoshinori Sato<ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>
>>>         Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>>>         Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck<linux@roeck-us.net>
>>>
>>>
>>> The related information in gcc/binutils:
>>>
>>>     We can build h8300 cross-compiler for Linux kernel, successfully,
>>> but it has many bugs when building Linux kernel with -Os.
>>>     if we still need h8300 for another OS, is it still valuable to send
>>> these bugs to Bugzilla (although it is found under Linux)?
>> It is still useful to send code generation bugs for the H8/300 series to
>> the GCC folks.
>>
>
> OK, thanks, I will wait for 1-2 days which may get another members'
> opinions for discussing.
>
> If no additional opinions, I will report them to Bugzilla, and I should
> try to continue 'work' with related members (although I am a newbie for
> compiler and binutils programming).
>
>> jeff
>>
>>
>>
>
> Thanks.

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Chen Gang]

On 09/11/2013 03:55 AM, Michael Schewe wrote:
> Hello Maintainers,
> 
> if you like to drop h8/300 support in linux kernel, thats OK for me.

OK, thanks.

> But i like to see it still supported in gcc & binutils, at least i have
> some projects and know companies using this architecture in embedded
> applications, bare metal without OS. These products have lifetime in
> range of 10...20 years and need toolchain support for software-updates.
> 

OK, thank you for your valuable information.

And it seems the issues of h8/300 for compiling Linux kernel is still
valuable to be focused on, just like Jeff Law said. :-)

> Michael
> 
> Please note for answers: i am only subscribed to binutils mailing list.
> 

Excuse me, my English is not quite well, and also I am a newbie in
binutils and gcc mailing list. I guess your meaning is:

  When send h8/300 related mails, better always include binutils@sourceware.org (although may it is only for gcc issues) ?

Is it correct ? (if it is correct, not need reply)


Thanks.

> Chen Gang schrieb:
>> On 09/10/2013 10:19 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 09/09/2013 07:13 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>> Hello Maintainers:
>>>>
>>>> After google search and check the Linux kernel, H8/300 is dead, and for
>>>> gcc-4.9.0 and binutils-2.23.2 still has h8300, do we still need it for
>>>> another OS ?
>>>>
>>>> Welcome any suggestions or completions, thanks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The related information in linux kernel next tree:
>>>>
>>>>     commit d02babe847bf96b82b12cc4e4e90028ac3fac73f
>>>>     Author: Guenter Roeck<linux@roeck-us.net>
>>>>     Date:   Fri Aug 30 06:01:49 2013 -0700
>>>>
>>>>         Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture
>>>>
>>>>         H8/300 has been dead for several years, and the kernel for it
>>>>         has not compiled for ages. Drop support for it.
>>>>
>>>>         Cc: Yoshinori Sato<ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>
>>>>         Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>>>>         Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck<linux@roeck-us.net>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The related information in gcc/binutils:
>>>>
>>>>     We can build h8300 cross-compiler for Linux kernel, successfully,
>>>> but it has many bugs when building Linux kernel with -Os.
>>>>     if we still need h8300 for another OS, is it still valuable to send
>>>> these bugs to Bugzilla (although it is found under Linux)?
>>> It is still useful to send code generation bugs for the H8/300 series to
>>> the GCC folks.
>>>
>>
>> OK, thanks, I will wait for 1-2 days which may get another members'
>> opinions for discussing.
>>
>> If no additional opinions, I will report them to Bugzilla, and I should
>> try to continue 'work' with related members (although I am a newbie for
>> compiler and binutils programming).
>>
>>> jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks.


-- 
Chen Gang

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Chen Gang]

Hello all:

I have send the related issues to "http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla", please
check if you like, thanks.

currently, I only send 3 bugs: Bug58256, Bug58400, Bug58401, the other
bugs may duplicate with these bugs, so I do not send (if they are also
valuable, I will send too).


Next, I should analyse them (better with another related members), my
analyzing way is:

  compare it with another correct compiler (e.g x86 compiler) by code and by debugging.

Wish one of these bugs can be fixed by us within a week (although I am
not quite sure for it: I have no experience for compiler development).


Welcome any members' suggestions or completions :-).

Thanks.

On 09/11/2013 09:02 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 09/11/2013 03:55 AM, Michael Schewe wrote:
>> Hello Maintainers,
>>
>> if you like to drop h8/300 support in linux kernel, thats OK for me.
> 
> OK, thanks.
> 
>> But i like to see it still supported in gcc & binutils, at least i have
>> some projects and know companies using this architecture in embedded
>> applications, bare metal without OS. These products have lifetime in
>> range of 10...20 years and need toolchain support for software-updates.
>>
> 
> OK, thank you for your valuable information.
> 
> And it seems the issues of h8/300 for compiling Linux kernel is still
> valuable to be focused on, just like Jeff Law said. :-)
> 
>> Michael
>>
>> Please note for answers: i am only subscribed to binutils mailing list.
>>
> 
> Excuse me, my English is not quite well, and also I am a newbie in
> binutils and gcc mailing list. I guess your meaning is:
> 
>   When send h8/300 related mails, better always include binutils@sourceware.org (although may it is only for gcc issues) ?
> 
> Is it correct ? (if it is correct, not need reply)
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>> Chen Gang schrieb:
>>> On 09/10/2013 10:19 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>> On 09/09/2013 07:13 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>>> Hello Maintainers:
>>>>>
>>>>> After google search and check the Linux kernel, H8/300 is dead, and for
>>>>> gcc-4.9.0 and binutils-2.23.2 still has h8300, do we still need it for
>>>>> another OS ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Welcome any suggestions or completions, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The related information in linux kernel next tree:
>>>>>
>>>>>     commit d02babe847bf96b82b12cc4e4e90028ac3fac73f
>>>>>     Author: Guenter Roeck<linux@roeck-us.net>
>>>>>     Date:   Fri Aug 30 06:01:49 2013 -0700
>>>>>
>>>>>         Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture
>>>>>
>>>>>         H8/300 has been dead for several years, and the kernel for it
>>>>>         has not compiled for ages. Drop support for it.
>>>>>
>>>>>         Cc: Yoshinori Sato<ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>
>>>>>         Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>>>>>         Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck<linux@roeck-us.net>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The related information in gcc/binutils:
>>>>>
>>>>>     We can build h8300 cross-compiler for Linux kernel, successfully,
>>>>> but it has many bugs when building Linux kernel with -Os.
>>>>>     if we still need h8300 for another OS, is it still valuable to send
>>>>> these bugs to Bugzilla (although it is found under Linux)?
>>>> It is still useful to send code generation bugs for the H8/300 series to
>>>> the GCC folks.
>>>>
>>>
>>> OK, thanks, I will wait for 1-2 days which may get another members'
>>> opinions for discussing.
>>>
>>> If no additional opinions, I will report them to Bugzilla, and I should
>>> try to continue 'work' with related members (although I am a newbie for
>>> compiler and binutils programming).
>>>
>>>> jeff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks.
> 
> 


-- 
Chen Gang

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Jeff Law]

On 09/11/2013 10:38 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
> Hello all:
> 
> I have send the related issues to "http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla", please
> check if you like, thanks.
> 
> currently, I only send 3 bugs: Bug58256, Bug58400, Bug58401, the other
> bugs may duplicate with these bugs, so I do not send (if they are also
> valuable, I will send too).
> 
> 
> Next, I should analyse them (better with another related members), my
> analyzing way is:
> 
>    compare it with another correct compiler (e.g x86 compiler) by code and by debugging.
> 
> Wish one of these bugs can be fixed by us within a week (although I am
> not quite sure for it: I have no experience for compiler development).
Please include the preprocessed source.  The easiest way to get that is
to add the "-save-temps" option to the command line.  That will create a
.i file which is the self-contained preprocessed code.  We need that to
be able to debug these issues.

jeff

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Chen Gang]

On 09/13/2013 01:09 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 09/11/2013 10:38 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>> Hello all:
>>
>> I have send the related issues to "http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla", please
>> check if you like, thanks.
>>
>> currently, I only send 3 bugs: Bug58256, Bug58400, Bug58401, the other
>> bugs may duplicate with these bugs, so I do not send (if they are also
>> valuable, I will send too).
>>
>>
>> Next, I should analyse them (better with another related members), my
>> analyzing way is:
>>
>>    compare it with another correct compiler (e.g x86 compiler) by code and by debugging.
>>
>> Wish one of these bugs can be fixed by us within a week (although I am
>> not quite sure for it: I have no experience for compiler development).
> Please include the preprocessed source.  The easiest way to get that is
> to add the "-save-temps" option to the command line.  That will create a
> .i file which is the self-contained preprocessed code.  We need that to
> be able to debug these issues.
> 

OK, thanks.

I put related ".i" files to all related bugs, please check, thanks.

Hmm... for myself, during this week end, I shall:

  1. construct the related environments.
       make x86, h8300 cross-compiler (disable-release, enable-debug).
       let them compile the same file which can cause issue under h8300.

  2. learn about these .i files.
       know about .i files.
       compare the related .i files between x86, arm, h8300.
       know the direct cause.

  3. can debug gcc (may with .i file) with gdb.

Welcome any additional information or suggestions. :-)

> jeff
> 
> 
> 

Thanks
-- 
Chen Gang

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Chung-Ju Wu]

2013/9/13 Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>:
> On 09/13/2013 01:09 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 09/11/2013 10:38 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> Hello all:
>>>
[...]
>>> currently, I only send 3 bugs: Bug58256, Bug58400, Bug58401, the other
>>> bugs may duplicate with these bugs, so I do not send (if they are also
>>> valuable, I will send too).
>>>
[...]
>> Please include the preprocessed source.  The easiest way to get that is
>> to add the "-save-temps" option to the command line.  That will create a
>> .i file which is the self-contained preprocessed code.  We need that to
>> be able to debug these issues.
>>
>
> I put related ".i" files to all related bugs, please check, thanks.
>
[...]
>
> Welcome any additional information or suggestions. :-)
>

It seems that all of your cases (PR58256, PR58400, PR58401) are
related to compilation error.  I think the next step is to reduce the
self-contained code that reproduces the same error for easily debugging. :)


Best regards,
jasonwucj

Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils

[Chen Gang]

On 09/13/2013 01:02 PM, Chung-Ju Wu wrote:
> 2013/9/13 Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>:
>> > On 09/13/2013 01:09 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> >> On 09/11/2013 10:38 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>> >>> Hello all:
>>>> >>>
> [...]
>>>> >>> currently, I only send 3 bugs: Bug58256, Bug58400, Bug58401, the other
>>>> >>> bugs may duplicate with these bugs, so I do not send (if they are also
>>>> >>> valuable, I will send too).
>>>> >>>
> [...]
>>> >> Please include the preprocessed source.  The easiest way to get that is
>>> >> to add the "-save-temps" option to the command line.  That will create a
>>> >> .i file which is the self-contained preprocessed code.  We need that to
>>> >> be able to debug these issues.
>>> >>
>> >
>> > I put related ".i" files to all related bugs, please check, thanks.
>> >
> [...]
>> >
>> > Welcome any additional information or suggestions. :-)
>> >
> It seems that all of your cases (PR58256, PR58400, PR58401) are
> related to compilation error.  I think the next step is to reduce the
> self-contained code that reproduces the same error for easily debugging. :)

Yeah, that sounds good, thanks.

It is easy to exclude some lines to let it pass compiling, we can get
the 2 .i files to compare (one include the related some lines, the other
exclude them).  I will also do it during week-end.

And excuse me, during these days, I have to do internal things within my
company, but at least, I should still try to fix one of them within a
week (the end time is 2013-09-19), especially with many members' help.

:-)


Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang