This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: IBM z13 support for older GCCs
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- Cc: Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 10:28:39 +0200
- Subject: Re: IBM z13 support for older GCCs
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <555EE48E dot 9090209 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <alpine dot LSU dot 2 dot 11 dot 1505221015270 dot 30088 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:22:07AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> I'm somewhat missing the point of backporting z13 support. ppc64le
> enablement was a different story (IBM basically saying ppc64-linux
> is dead), but surely all z13 machines can run non-z13 code just fine.
> s390x-linux-gnu is a secondary platform so I don't think we'd want
> to destabilize it (esp. on the 4.8 branch where I expect only one
> more release around the end of June with no chance to fix things up).
> So that's a "no" from me basically. But I'm willing to be convinced
> otherwise (not having looked into the z13 backend patches at all).
Yeah, agreed, I'd find that too risky and the 35 alternatives thing (and
other generic code changes) make it even less desirable.
Say on i?86/x86_64 new ISA additions weren't backported to release branches
either, on other branches too. ppc64le has been indeed an exception, and
the power8 enablement (as opposed to just le enablement) has been backported
primarily because ppc64le states that power8 is the minimum supported