From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 109128 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2020 14:02:00 -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 109110 invoked by uid 89); 27 Jan 2020 14:02:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-24.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_0,GIT_PATCH_1,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy= X-HELO: smtp1.axis.com Received: from smtp1.axis.com (HELO smtp1.axis.com) (195.60.68.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 27 Jan 2020 14:01:57 +0000 IronPort-SDR: No4OvpEvNm/8pdbgajf0ez6JubGMkJ86Rf4l9pjDZv6Z/753VcS7AxKmeUecuFZQFlvo2xHjEQ KD8QhL4eMcOnxGyWKv6krjHWgr1Ol543iSE20I9hLg5U4rRQLDk/asDpAzLNI4GA42O6+0gAbn nHpvDSEAyZlN0nhrvkETLhiqNJoNVEdNNxBcoK01FU6pGPeXiUyebH+xF1d39uql/OuV+fV8e6 U5ns9khlhWQpInMvqoaLqlIgvAWM0fxAqHUizTM8kn8mcH4gMaAaHyb2Jsui7BIsOalx3WcIE8 J1s= Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 14:35:00 -0000 Message-ID: <202001271401.00RE1skf031563@ignucius.se.axis.com> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson To: CC: In-Reply-To: <1ee03bc0-ad1a-46dd-87bb-8288e990ce20@redhat.com> (message from Jeff Law on Fri, 20 Sep 2019 17:38:38 +0200) Subject: Re: Deprecating cc0 (and consequently cc0 targets) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-Path: hp@axis.com X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2020-01/txt/msg01744.txt.bz2 > From: Jeff Law > Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2019 17:38:38 +0200 Hi. I'm not going to question > The first step in that process is to drop support for cc0. but could you please elaborate on... > [cc0 support in gcc core] > code is broken in various ways, > particularly WRT exceptions. ...that last part? If you mean asynchronous exceptions then perhaps in theory, except there's no need to (and no state to) "unwind" to in-between cc0 setter and user. But I guess that goes for "MODE_CC" targets too; exception information isn't that precise. > This patch deprecates the affected targets. (Not applied yet? Before the gcc-10 branch? Can you please consider dropping cris* from that part when rebasing it, as per contents on master and my pledge to merge axis/cris-decc0?) > diff --git a/gcc/config.gcc b/gcc/config.gcc > index 69d0a024d85..0c1637e8be1 100644 > --- a/gcc/config.gcc > +++ b/gcc/config.gcc > @@ -248,6 +248,12 @@ md_file= > # Obsolete configurations. > case ${target} in > tile*-*-* \ > + avr*-*-* \ > + h8300*-*-* \ > + cris*-*-* \ > + m68k*-*-* \ > + vax*-*-* \ > + cr16*-*-* \ > ) > if test "x$enable_obsolete" != xyes; then > echo "*** Configuration ${target} is obsolete." >&2 > @@ -273,7 +279,6 @@ case ${target} in > | arm*-*-uclinux* \ > | i[34567]86-go32-* \ > | i[34567]86-*-go32* \ > - | m68k-*-uclinuxoldabi* \ > | mips64orion*-*-rtems* \ > | pdp11-*-bsd \ > | powerpc*-*-linux*paired* \ > @@ -294,7 +299,6 @@ case ${target} in > | *-*-solaris2.[0-9].* \ > | *-*-solaris2.10* \ > | *-*-sysv* \ > - | vax-*-vms* \ > ) > echo "*** Configuration ${target} not supported" 1>&2 > exit 1 Beware, the two last hunks shouldn't be applied, else the patch will actually make m68k-*-uclinuxoldabi* andvax-*-vms* available (by --enable-obsolete). That part would go in when actually removing the targets. I may have lost track of the conversation that followed; maybe the patch was itself obsoleted. brgds, H-P