From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Remove tilegx port
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 11:26:19 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4f6f6682-1fd3-18b3-8b8c-bbd0fb38fb17@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1804271534430.17705@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
On 04/27/2018 09:36 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> Since tile support has been removed from the Linux kernel for 4.17,
> this patch removes the (unmaintained) port to tilegx from glibc (the
> tilepro support having been previously removed). This reflects the
> general principle that a glibc port needs upstream support for the
> architecture in all the components it build-depends on (so binutils,
> GCC and the Linux kernel, for the normal case of a port supporting the
> Linux kernel but no other OS), in order to be maintainable.
>
> Apart from removal of sysdeps/tile and sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/tile
> (omitted from the diffs below), there are updates to various comments
> referencing tile for which removal of those references seemed
> appropriate. The configuration is removed from README and from
> build-many-glibcs.py. contrib.texi keeps mention of removed
> contributions, but I updated Chris Metcalf's entry to reflect that he
> also contributed the non-removed support for the generic Linux kernel
> syscall interface. __ASSUME_FADVISE64_64_NO_ALIGN support is removed,
> as it was only used by tile.
Given tilegx/tilepro removal from the kernel and glibc, should we go
ahead and deprecate them in GCC? The only tilegx/tilepro configurations
are -linux.
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-27 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-27 15:36 Remove tilegx port Joseph Myers
2018-04-27 16:19 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2018-04-27 17:26 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2018-04-27 17:42 ` Richard Biener
2018-04-27 19:32 ` Jeff Law
2021-09-10 11:50 ` Richard Biener via Libc-alpha
2021-09-10 13:53 ` Jeff Law via Libc-alpha
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/involved.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4f6f6682-1fd3-18b3-8b8c-bbd0fb38fb17@redhat.com \
--to=law@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).