Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:58:01 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> Subject: Re: Patches to compile the kernel with Intel's C/C++ compiler Message-ID: <20031111095801.66c6fdff.Alexander@Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <p06002001bbd5ca70aa90@[128.113.24.47]> References: <20031110222221.36a11979.Alexander@Leidinger.net> <p06002001bbd5ca70aa90@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:16:40 -0500
Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> wrote:
> Will some of these be reasonable to commit before 5.2?
All of them. Except for the "not_yet" parts of stdarg.h and _types.h, as
icc needs to learn the gcc syntax of the used constructs first (it's on
the TODO list @Intel). And except for parts where I get negative reviews
here (none so far)...
> Even if there are some issues, those issues will only
> come up if someone *does* use the icc compiler, right?
Yes.
> So, they'd be safe to add as far as anyone using gcc
> is concerned?
Yes, as I use NFS on my desktop I can't run a icc compiled kernel on it,
but I have (various incarnations of) the icc patches in the src tree
since a long time and everything runs fine (or better: not different
than for those on -current@ without the patches :-) ) on the gcc
compiled system.
If a src committer looks into them and offers to commit them (or
approves to commit them): the FreeBSD version needs to get bumped
because of the cdefs.h changes (short description: "cdefs.h support for
Intel's C/C++ compiler"), I need to know about them in the icc port.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
0 and 1. Now what could be so hard about that?
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net
GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031111095801.66c6fdff.Alexander>