From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 21 08:10:59 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51D524C9; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 08:10:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pd0-x234.google.com (mail-pd0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1054190E; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 08:10:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pd0-f180.google.com with SMTP id ft15so19167103pdb.11; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:10:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to :references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=0re12HAM00huPv1f8FonSDKeE/E+z+5peK76Z6B2YLQ=; b=aGrwCvxcMTvPrzraQ6nVjh1U3/WbecHaVIs8SgkuKNz2Cj/GMLKTXhW3el8hGkIwHn m1T9OzhzSOp9gWMOHp6vJZLWZzlUZBDxjVnppYr07JC556ApQgHUio4GhNy5CsUUgP5I 8i8RThZDSz3Yy8f13gSKL18LGIKbBsC21ax4U9dOckn/ZxIdeLzfv1Zm9xhyFFPm2JFx 6U2ZfYA9jPWwIfvNQU0NTngN6sG1noarEBISg3BZGqOm0vnWaAZ3VK2wogKUV+3j0uYH fmyfB8EG3Ku7wu/OW/T/PhkWh/7lBuGGbY57xTvi4MkgynSRP4fyvvDnWScCq8btBl4p l0ig== X-Received: by 10.68.68.167 with SMTP id x7mr28703767pbt.23.1421827858497; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:10:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from ox ([24.6.44.228]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id xc7sm5089872pbc.29.2015.01.21.00.10.56 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:10:57 -0800 (PST) Sender: Navdeep Parhar Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:10:50 -0800 From: Navdeep Parhar To: Dimitry Andric Subject: Re: svn commit: r276485 - in head/sys: conf dev/cxgbe modules/cxgbe/if_cxgbe Message-ID: <20150121081050.GA4505@ox> Mail-Followup-To: Dimitry Andric , Pedro Giffuni , Adrian Chadd , Luigi Rizzo , "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" References: <20150106203344.GB26068@ox> <54BEE07A.3070207@FreeBSD.org> <54BEE305.6020905@FreeBSD.org> <54BEF7CF.9030505@FreeBSD.org> <20150121021905.GA73548@FreeBSD.org> <54BF1EB0.2080901@FreeBSD.org> <20150121055329.GB3307@ox> <98838DA6-1969-4764-83DE-71F7BB568E23@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <98838DA6-1969-4764-83DE-71F7BB568E23@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: Adrian Chadd , "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , Pedro Giffuni , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" , Luigi Rizzo X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 08:10:59 -0000 On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 09:00:03AM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 21 Jan 2015, at 06:53, Navdeep Parhar wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:36:16PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > >> > >> On 01/20/15 22:06, Adrian Chadd wrote: > >>> On 20 January 2015 at 18:19, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > >>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 07:50:23PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote: > >>>>> But the fix is rather ugly, isn't it? I would personally prefer to just > >>>>> kill the older gcc but in the meantime updating it so that it behaves > >>>>> like the updated gcc/clang would be better. IMHO. > >>>> Seconded. Putting extra harness on the code to avoid bugs in the compiler > >>>> that were actually fixed upsteam is totally bogus. > >>> Right, but: > >>> > >>> * not all of us work on compilers; > >>> * not all of us want to currently be working on compilers; > >>> * some of us have to use the gcc that's in tree; > >>> * .. and apparently updating that gcc to something > 4.2 is verboten. > >> > >> The external toolchain can't be that bad(?). > >> > >>> So if someone wants to help Navdeep by backporting those options, > >> > >> Hmm .. didn't I post a patch? > >> > >>> please do. I bet he'd love the help. > >>> > >> Ugh he doesn't and TBH, I don't care enough to look for > >> consensus either. > > > > Let's please just move on from this discussion then. I am not familiar > > with gcc internals so I can't vouch for this patch, and gcc is the > > default compiler on platforms that I cannot test. Given that, it would > > be reckless of me to push a gcc patch just to get it to play nice with > > one single file in the tree. High risk, little reward (given that > > -fms-extensions can be applied to just the file in question without > > disturbing anything else in the tree). > > Alternatively, just use the ${GCC_MS_EXTENSIONS} Makefile macro, which > I specifically introduced for this issue. Ah, a rose with another name. I'm happy to use this but it's not clear why there is a GCC in the macro's name when clang deals with -fms-extensions just as well. (It's not even clear why the longer ${GCC_MS_EXTENSIONS} should be preferred to -fms-extentions. Isn't this like #define ONE 1 ?) In any case I'm perfectly fine with any change that doesn't involve a commit from me to gcc. Regards, Navdeep > > See e.g. sys/modules/ibcore/Makefile for an example. > > -Dimitry >