Page MenuHomeFreeBSD
Differential D26819

cdefs: require gcc 4.2 or later
AbandonedPublic
Actions

Authored by imp on Oct 16 2020, 5:20 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Tue, May 19, 10:30 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Mon, May 18, 1:31 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mon, May 18, 1:24 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sun, May 10, 12:09 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sun, May 10, 12:09 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sun, May 10, 12:08 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Fri, May 8, 11:51 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Thu, Apr 30, 8:21 PM
View All 92 Files
Subscribers
cem
rpokala

Details

Reviewers
vangyzen
cem
emaste
Summary

Remove all support for gcc < 4.2.

Diff Detail

Lint
Lint Passed
Unit
No Test Coverage
Build Status
Buildable 34216
Build 31364: arc lint + arc unit

Event Timeline

imp requested review of this revision.Oct 16 2020, 5:20 PM
imp created this revision.
Harbormaster completed remote builds in B34216: Diff 78323.Oct 16 2020, 5:21 PM
imp added parent revisions: D26818: cdefs: Assume __GNUC__ defined, D26817: cdefs.h: remove intel_compiler support.Oct 16 2020, 5:21 PM
rpokala added a subscriber: rpokala.Oct 16 2020, 5:24 PM

cdefs: require gcc 4.2

... or later! 😉

imp added a comment.Oct 16 2020, 5:28 PM
In D26819#597855, @rpokala wrote:

cdefs: require gcc 4.2

... or later! 😉

Yes. Or later :)

I'll update my commit message.

imp retitled this revision from cdefs: require gcc 4.2 to cdefs: require gcc 4.2 or later.Oct 16 2020, 5:28 PM
vangyzen accepted this revision.Oct 16 2020, 6:29 PM
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Oct 16 2020, 6:29 PM
cem accepted this revision.Oct 16 2020, 6:34 PM
cem added a subscriber: cem.

Excellent.

sys/sys/cdefs.h
322

This one is almost killable too. Outside of ce(4), we use this in one location: i386 resumectx(). And it isn't clear (to me) that we need the oddball calling convention in that location. Maybe we do.

emaste accepted this revision.Oct 16 2020, 6:37 PM
imp added inline comments.Oct 16 2020, 6:40 PM
sys/sys/cdefs.h
322

This one is almost killable too. Outside of ce(4), we use this in one location: i386 resumectx(). And it isn't clear (to me) that we need the oddball calling convention in that location. Maybe we do.

ce(4) doesn't matter: it will define it if it isn't already defined. So we can safely ignore it. :)

I'm not sure what resumectx() does on i386,... I may investigate though...

But in any event, I was going to do an audit of all these defines to see what's still used as a followup.

imp abandoned this revision.Mar 15 2023, 5:37 PM

I'm going to start again here.

imp added a comment.Mar 15 2023, 5:53 PM

https://reviews.freebsd.org/D39097 and https://reviews.freebsd.org/D39098 replace this

Revision Contents
Changeset List

PathSize
sys/
sys/
98 lines

Diff 78323

View Options

sys/sys/cdefs.h

Loading...