From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 68681 invoked by alias); 31 Oct 2019 22:47:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 68673 invoked by uid 89); 31 Oct 2019 22:47:48 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=officially, republic, Republic, PRs X-HELO: mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de Received: from mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de (HELO mo4-p05-ob.smtp.rzone.de) (81.169.146.181) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 22:47:46 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1572562064; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=gjlay.de; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:From:Date:Message-ID: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=Cqz7ZQ+BM94SgUGlq5BVBbwcJ5rwJ8RVbeU/NWNhHQA=; b=rFeyvwCAwJ113EciKV0W+QRDACw1ab07C1xYmJok2gozfA5NMLIjn5WHHmO2WGa/2N dTEyR7nHK1ZOC1iIIKH9ZcWDwmzeXos3aT2+rLRNUCTlsxgmV1agWrRN5F+xdB9XzUhZ v9Ry1/Fym6Tj41OWyM7mg2wrDnjDRjaO+nHMY6Icpg4RisVhoUyatVHYkdehqa/lvFON neEmv0encrO/iuLcJs4bd5GvdBKh9Mqh4PvmyIc01E1NLB+ezVYTldSYbYUNCX+lAkwu GNiRG2qo8g/ySae/xVuJKn1SClTRNPfPjX9ypbvyz7Q/F182ojVcU+YEQs+6evUFX/Wc uyJg== Received: from [192.168.2.100] by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 44.29.0 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id z06ddev9VMlh79Z (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (curve secp521r1 with 521 ECDH bits, eq. 15360 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate); Thu, 31 Oct 2019 23:47:43 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5DBB6443.70407@gcc.gnu.org> Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 22:47:00 -0000 From: Georg-Johann Lay User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz CC: Peter Bergner , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: BountySource campaign for gcc PR/91851 References: <78b73cb4-2d3f-2e71-c334-8a3cba768c55@physik.fu-berlin.de> <5DB9E51B.40909@gcc.gnu.org> <52f7f0ca-7dd2-0cf6-0b9a-e08852b7301f@linux.ibm.com> <5DBB4B51.3040101@gcc.gnu.org> <8f8eed9b-3e0f-9bd1-bd49-3f4c2a615cee@physik.fu-berlin.de> In-Reply-To: <8f8eed9b-3e0f-9bd1-bd49-3f4c2a615cee@physik.fu-berlin.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2019-10/txt/msg00204.txt.bz2 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz schrieb: > On 10/31/19 10:00 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote: >>>> I didn't follow the lists for some time... At least neither v9 or v10 >>>> release notes caveats mention such deprecation, neither is there >>>> respective PRs for the cc0 targets. >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-09/msg01256.html >>> >>> Peter >> Ah, thanks. >> >> So finally, the time has come to move to clang/llvm ? > > Not quite. Motorola 68k is currently not officially supported by LLVM/Clang. For AVR -- an other port affected by cc0 removal -- there is a LLVM/Clang port. It' not as mature as GCC's avr port, but what counts in the end is support / responsiveness from the community and an openness for the requirements of deeply embedded targets. I had gcc patches rejected by global maintainers (just a no-op hook for other targets) because it appeared they didn't even understand what the patch is about (and kept proposing alternative "solutions" that totally missed the point). And code quality is deteriorating from version to version. Whatever you do in the backend to mitigate it, there's always global changes that shreds any improvements... Btw, does GCC support clobbering registers in branches (or cbranch4 for that matter)? This requirement would come up when transitioning avr to cc_mode because cbranches would live post reload. Johann > There is a port that is half-finished though [1] and there is also one guy from > Czech Republic who wrote a Bachelor thesis on an m68k backend for LLVM [2]. I > have not been able to contact him though as his university address bounces. > I would love to see the code that was written there. > > I have also played around with Rust on m68k based on the LLVM code on [1], but > it doesn't really work yet. I think finishing LLVM for m68k would be another > idea for a Bountysource campaign. > > Adrian > >> [1] https://github.com/M680x0/M680x0-llvm/ >> [2] https://www.vutbr.cz/en/students/final-thesis?zp_id=34902 >> [3] https://github.com/glaubitz/rust/tree/m68k-linux