From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 82073 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2017 12:27:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 82056 invoked by uid 89); 17 Feb 2017 12:27:58 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=claims X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:27:57 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx16.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 612963A7696; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:27:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-117-76.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.76]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5161B5063; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:27:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v1HCRrRT021239; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:27:53 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id v1HCRov0021238; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:27:50 +0100 Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:30:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Richard Biener Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, jason@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH][C++] Annotate more functions with MEM-STATs Message-ID: <20170217122750.GI1849@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-02/txt/msg01107.txt.bz2 On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 01:22:57PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > And even unify CXX_MEM_STAT_INFO and MEM_STAT_INFO, also dropping support > for host compilers < GCC 4.8, GCC 4.8 introduced __builtin_FILE and > friends (you'd have to bootstrap with older host compilers or clang > which doesn't seem to support those either and still claims to be > GCC 4.2.1 ...). Do you mean drop support for host < GCC 4.8 if detailed mem stats gathering is requested, or dropping support for such host compilers altogether? I have no problem with the former, big problem with the latter. Jakub