This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GCC 4.3.0 Status Report (2008-02-14)


On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Joel Sherrill
<joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com> wrote:
>
> Richard Guenther wrote:
>  > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Joel Sherrill
>  > <joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com> wrote:
>  >
>  >> Alexandre Pereira Nunes wrote:
>  >>  > Also regarding ARM, PR31849
>  >>  > (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31849
>  >>  > <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31849>) is a show stopper,
>  >>  > at least for some embedded bare metal targets, i.e. arm-elf and
>  >>  > arm-none-eabi.
>  >>  >
>  >>  > Until size optimization at least matches gcc 4.2, gcc 4.3 will have very
>  >>  > limited audience there. I'm not aware of gcc internals in order to help
>  >>  > with a fix, but I'm available to help testing, should anyone requires that.
>  >>  >
>  >>  >
>  >>  The m68k/coldfire is suffering from this regression the
>  >>  RTEMS community really would like to see resolved.
>  >>
>  >>  http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35088
>  >>
>  >>  I just emailed everyone who touched the m68k port since
>  >>  last summer a charity appeal. :-D
>  >>
>  >
>  > No m86k triple is primary or secondary target, so this is not going to
>  > block the release.
>  > But there was plenty of time for the rtems/m68k people to look at problems with
>  > their port.
>  >
>  >
>  True enough but this wasn't broken by anything specific
>  to RTEMS.  It is just a regression that someone caused
>  and if they worked on m68k, it is worth a look.  Technical
>  pride has to play a place somehow.  I never said it was
>  worth stopping a release for.
>
>  There are reports on the m68k which look good for 4.1
>  and 4.2 releases.  Looking at the long list of patches
>  Debian is using makes be wonder if it is already fixed
>  but not in the SVN tree.
>
>  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-02/msg00700.html
>
>  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2008-02/msg00073.html
>  lists this patch.  I know it is against 4.1 but I wonder if it is the fix.
>
>
>  m68k-dwarf3:
>   emit correct dwarf info for cfa offset and register with -fomit-frame-pointer
>
>
>  I don't see any m68k Debian tests against the trunk.  Only 4.1
>  and 4.2 which to their credit are recent and frequent.

I expect broken non-primary and non-secondary platforms to catch up later,
after all, this 4.3.0 will be a .0 release and 4.3.1 will be scheduled about
two month later.

Richard.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]