Re: PROPOSAL: Policy for obsoleting targets

[Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at OARcorp dot com>]

Peter Barada wrote:
> 
> >   At the time GCC version 3.n is released, all targets which have not
> >   had a successful build and test report posted to gcc-testresults
> >   for prereleases of minor version n, or releases n-1 and n-2, go on
> >   the obsoletion list for version n+1.  "Successful" means minimum
> >   useful functionality: it's okay if only the C compiler works.
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.2/buildstat.html or
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2003-04/ only shows host
> compilers, and no embedded targets(such as ppc-eabi, m68k-elf, etc).
> 
> How do we prevent embedded targets(that are know to work fine) from
> from being placed on the obsoletion list?

The m68k embedded targets (m68k-coff and m68k-elf) appear to both work
fine but have no test results reported in the mailing list archives.

I also have to point out that this would remove all *-rtems targets 
because we have to have an installed compiler to build RTEMS.  RTEMS
itself is a set of libraries that must be linked with the application
before being run on target hardware.  As of the last time I tried, the 
gcc test suite does not run on installed cross toolsets.  There is
something wrong with the scripts.  So I find the combination untestable.

This is why I try to report fairly regularly on targets I honestly
don't use for real work. My thinking is that CPU-elf or CPU-coff is
so close to CPU-rtems that any code generation problems are shared.

Importantly for embedded targets without simulators, it can be painful
to even run the suite requiring some significant effort to setup.

I decided to see how many targets which I thought had users would get
auto-deprecated by this policy.  Here is a quick take of targets 
which I did a search for in gcc-testresults.  <sarcasm on> I am pretty
sure 
that some of these have active users <sarcasm off>:

  *-vxworks - powerpc-vxworks is the only VxWorks target with 
              results reported and those are against 2.95.3 
              (20010125 prerelease).  
  *-vxwim      - No reports
  *-rtems      - No reports
  *-chorus*    - No reports
  *-lynx*      - No reports
  arm-ecos-elf - No reports
  avr*-*-*     - No reports
  m68k-coff    - No reports
  m68k-elf     - No reports
  m68k-atari-sysv4 - No reports
  *86-*-elf     - No reports
  *86-*-netware - No reports
  m68hc11*-*    - No reports
  m68hc12*-*    - No reports
  m88k*-*       - No reports
  pdp11*-*-*    - No reports
  xtensa*-*-*   - No reports
 
So that puts all VxWorks, RTEMS, ChorusOS, and LynxOS OS targets 
as well as the bare embedded m68k targets on the obsolete list.  What 
percentage of the embedded community does that cover?

I think this policy is probably OK for self-hosted environments but
raises the bar too high for embedded targets.  I fairly regularly 
report that at least the *-rtems and many of the embedded targets
without
simulators build.  I know what you are trying to achieve but this 
policy is too rough for embedded targets.

> --
> Peter Barada                                   Peter.Barada@motorola.com
> Wizard                                         781-852-2768 (direct)
> WaveMark Solutions(wholly owned by Motorola)   781-270-0193 (fax)

-- 
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel@OARcorp.com                 On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available                (256) 722-9985