From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 23 13:50:46 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: toolchain@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5897E93 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:50:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-ie0-f176.google.com (mail-ie0-f176.google.com [209.85.223.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B12182891 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:50:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f176.google.com with SMTP id s9so844918iec.35 for ; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 06:50:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=MzPYsY8mhizXky+GWWA9Ce9MhbFLVbpb5c2X44so0hk=; b=SaMOqAvFYd+brQkAs0Fl0y4snEaWOin57/5xLJH+eLqzcJ6J5uN23VIWluxIRGgAaf f2m+YLBm0f5b60JMzAnBs4F3+1p1fS8OfuHMARVSZl11R0ylhmeOzwiuSXq207bo1zcr d/Z4SEsroq+lANkec+pLkibgM/ZvTG4NdXA9PqionlXXGBsqucAr+e316n3CVpJQlxsj NXOPY0AtJBH/8bdnBAzO3+DBeYIPOT1D4a8q56ZiM8aN4XaLctqe3R1nuOGDfpV8t8Ef TrqG7xfkAskmPM4JtxZPvxjQvMnpWOFmVTSmUzBPTfQy4Bke+XmIfm7MroEPKohaFoWn Zasg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlRax4cyDejpcwF6N8WjSWfOZpMosqY9fvYOQI6t2om06JN5c3FeKigSpavV99VvqD9j5u5 X-Received: by 10.43.68.130 with SMTP id xy2mr884864icb.41.1377265840671; Fri, 23 Aug 2013 06:50:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 53.imp.bsdimp.com (50-78-194-198-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [50.78.194.198]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id p5sm3030742igj.10.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 23 Aug 2013 06:50:39 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Warner Losh Subject: Re: patch to add AES intrinsics to gcc Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 07:50:38 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9D48CB3D-E3FE-4189-9A6E-FE441C6854AB@bsdimp.com> References: <20130822200902.GG94127@funkthat.com> <105E26EE-8471-49D3-AB57-FBE2779CF8D0@FreeBSD.org> <5CE4B5FA-9DA0-45E4-8D67-161E0829FE6B@FreeBSD.org> <52173C8D.20608@freebsd.org> To: David Chisnall X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) Cc: toolchain@FreeBSD.org, John-Mark Gurney , Julian Elischer , current@FreeBSD.org, "re@FreeBSD.org Engineering Team" X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:50:47 -0000 On Aug 23, 2013, at 5:06 AM, David Chisnall wrote: > On 23 Aug 2013, at 11:42, Julian Elischer wrote: >=20 >> no, I believe we have said that 10 would ship with clang by default. = NO mention was made about gcc being absent, and I am uncomfortable with = taking that step yet. Having gcc just present, will not hurt you.. even = after it is gone we will need to support those who will be replacing = clang with newer versions of gcc in hteir own products. >=20 > The plan is not to delete gcc from the tree, it is to disable building = gcc by default when clang is the system compiler. If you are building = products then you are perfectly at liberty to set WITH_GCC=3Dyes in your = src.conf. >=20 > Our gcc is from 2007. It has no C11, no C++11 support. It has bugs = in its atomic generation so you can't use it sensibly without lots of = inline assembly (which it doesn't support for newer architectures) for = multithreaded things. >=20 > Our libstdc++ is ancient and doesn't work with modern C++ codebases. = Putting them in the base system means that people will use them. If = anyone wants them to remain, then speak now and this will be taken as = your volunteering to: >=20 > - Maintain our forks of both gcc and libstdc++ > - Handle every single PR that is filed by people using these >=20 > If you are willing to do this, then that's great. If not, then you = are asking other people to support ancient codebases that they are not = using. Well, it isn't quite that cut and dried. The date that gcc is from is not relevant. It works today for most of = the code out there. True, it doesn't have the latest features that a = small fraction of the code needs, but it works well enough. And it also = needs to be there for some upgrade paths. There's a use for gcc, and it = will likely be needed for these paths. As such, it has to work. Doesn't = matter if it is built by default or not, it simply has to keep working = as well as it has been working for the past 5 years to fill these roles. = For these tasks the nice C++ things simply don't matter or aren't = relevant. c11 features can't be put into the base for some time still = because of the issues on other architectures. We *HAVE* to have gcc on the other architectures. clang simply isn't = ready for MIPS, and has several outstanding problems on ARM. While work = is ongoing in these areas, clang simply won't be in as good a shape for = !x86 as it is for x86 in the 10.0 time frame. So even if gcc is turned off by default in 10 on x86, it still has to = work at least well enough to build the system and bootstrap clang. = Turning it off by default or on by default doesn't change this, and the = feature set that is used in 10 will basically be frozen soon, and the = non-x86 architectures will require the MI parts continue to work. I = don't see much decay that can happen in the x86MD parts that would break = it... Warner=