This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch] config.gcc: Obsolete c4x.
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Ralf Corsepius <ralf dot corsepius at rtems dot org>
- Cc: Kazu Hirata <kazu at cs dot umass dot edu>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, m dot hayes at elec dot canterbury dot ac dot nz, Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at OARcorp dot com>
- Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 08:49:41 -0700
- Subject: Re: [patch] config.gcc: Obsolete c4x.
- References: <email@example.com> <42702A83.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
1. I don't recall any consensus on abandoning QImode!=8bits.
I don't think this issue is relevant in terms of considering whether or
not to obsolete the C4X port. Whether or not QImode is always 8 bits is
a fine debate, but it's a separate debate. I certainly was not taking a
position on that debate in approving the obsoletion request.
Independent of the size of QImode, I think that everyone agrees that
supporting targets with > 8-bit minimum addressable units is a useful thing.
2. tic4x-gcc-3.4.x is buildable, tic4x-gcc-4.x had never built.
i.e. actually a regression has occurred sometime between 3.4.x and 4.0,
which had slipped through GCC-regression testing cracks.
Yes, and that is evidence that the platform is indeed obsolete. Nobody
was willing to invest in making it work in GCC 4.0.