This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils
- From: Chen Gang <gang dot chen at asianux dot com>
- To: Michael Schewe <michael dot schewe at gmx dot net>
- Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, linux at roeck-us dot net, Yoshinori Sato <ysato at users dot sourceforge dot jp>, binutils at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:02:38 +0800
- Subject: Re: [Suggestion] about h8/300 architecture in gcc and binutils
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023533DC32E at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <522CAAE0 dot 5010006 at redhat dot com> <6D39441BF12EF246A7ABCE6654B023533E40C5 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <522E7255 dot 6080301 at asianux dot com> <522E81B0 dot 6080403 at redhat dot com> <522E888A dot 2060005 at asianux dot com> <522F791E dot 2060603 at gmx dot net>
On 09/11/2013 03:55 AM, Michael Schewe wrote:
> Hello Maintainers,
> if you like to drop h8/300 support in linux kernel, thats OK for me.
> But i like to see it still supported in gcc & binutils, at least i have
> some projects and know companies using this architecture in embedded
> applications, bare metal without OS. These products have lifetime in
> range of 10...20 years and need toolchain support for software-updates.
OK, thank you for your valuable information.
And it seems the issues of h8/300 for compiling Linux kernel is still
valuable to be focused on, just like Jeff Law said. :-)
> Please note for answers: i am only subscribed to binutils mailing list.
Excuse me, my English is not quite well, and also I am a newbie in
binutils and gcc mailing list. I guess your meaning is:
When send h8/300 related mails, better always include email@example.com (although may it is only for gcc issues) ?
Is it correct ? (if it is correct, not need reply)
> Chen Gang schrieb:
>> On 09/10/2013 10:19 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 09/09/2013 07:13 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>> Hello Maintainers:
>>>> After google search and check the Linux kernel, H8/300 is dead, and for
>>>> gcc-4.9.0 and binutils-2.23.2 still has h8300, do we still need it for
>>>> another OS ?
>>>> Welcome any suggestions or completions, thanks.
>>>> The related information in linux kernel next tree:
>>>> commit d02babe847bf96b82b12cc4e4e90028ac3fac73f
>>>> Author: Guenter Roeck<firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>> Date: Fri Aug 30 06:01:49 2013 -0700
>>>> Drop support for Renesas H8/300 (h8300) architecture
>>>> H8/300 has been dead for several years, and the kernel for it
>>>> has not compiled for ages. Drop support for it.
>>>> Cc: Yoshinori Sato<email@example.com>
>>>> Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman<firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck<email@example.com>
>>>> The related information in gcc/binutils:
>>>> We can build h8300 cross-compiler for Linux kernel, successfully,
>>>> but it has many bugs when building Linux kernel with -Os.
>>>> if we still need h8300 for another OS, is it still valuable to send
>>>> these bugs to Bugzilla (although it is found under Linux)?
>>> It is still useful to send code generation bugs for the H8/300 series to
>>> the GCC folks.
>> OK, thanks, I will wait for 1-2 days which may get another members'
>> opinions for discussing.
>> If no additional opinions, I will report them to Bugzilla, and I should
>> try to continue 'work' with related members (although I am a newbie for
>> compiler and binutils programming).