Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote: >> > I think >> > depreciating Itanium1 tuning for 4.4 and removing it in 4.5 is >> > reasonable.  Code generated and tuned for Itanium2

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote: > > I think > > depreciating Itanium1 tuning for 4.4 and removing it in 4.5 is > > reasonable.  Code generated and tuned for Itanium2 should run fine on > > Itanium1 (Merced).  It won't be scheduled

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Steve Ellcey wrote: > I think > depreciating Itanium1 tuning for 4.4 and removing it in 4.5 is > reasonable.  Code generated and tuned for Itanium2 should run fine on > Itanium1 (Merced).  It won't be scheduled optimally of course, but it > should run correctly. (.

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 00:24 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > >> I can't find any test results in gcc-testresults reported with > >> -mtune=itanium1 [1]. > > > > ...especially if theye do not even contribute test results or > > feedback when t

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Laurent GUERBY wrote: > I'm building with GCC "Debian 4.3.2-1.1" as bootstrap compiler, > CC is not defined, configure: > > ../trunk/configure --prefix=/n/41/guerby/install-trunk > --enable-languages=c,ada --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-nls > --enable-threads=posi

Re : Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

2009/3/20, Laurent GUERBY : > May be debian has some itanium patches. No, GCC in Debian doesn't have any local ia64 specific patch. :-) Arthur.

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Fri, 2009-03-20 at 19:09 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Laurent GUERBY wrote: > > The compile farm machine gcc41 is a Merced based machine: > ... > > model name : Merced > ... > > Now I don't know if gcc41 falls in your -mtune=itanium1 category > > or not. > >

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Laurent GUERBY wrote: > The compile farm machine gcc41 is a Merced based machine: ... > model name : Merced ... > Now I don't know if gcc41 falls in your -mtune=itanium1 category > or not. I believe it does. You may well have one of the last ones running there ;-)

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Sun, 2009-03-15 at 17:16 +0100, Steven Bosscher wrote: > I can't find any test results in > gcc-testresults reported with -mtune=itanium1 [1]. Those people who > still use Itanium1 are probably better off if they stick with the > older GCC releases (pre-gcc-3.4) because at least back then, Itan

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:52 PM, NightStrike wrote: > So because Itanium1 has fallen into disuse, you are dropping support > for Itanium2?  Or have I misread this? You are *so* wrong it's hardly worht answering, but anyway... Of course *NOT* remove Itanium2, duh! But yes, remove Itanum1 schedul

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 7:10 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> Steven Bosscher writes: >> >>>      case OPT_mfixed_range_: >>> @@ -5245,6 +5247,13 @@ ia64_handle_option (size_t code, const char *arg, >>>         if (!strcmp (arg, processor_alias_

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: >> Steven Bosscher writes: >> >>>      case OPT_mfixed_range_: >>> @@ -5245,6 +5247,13 @@ ia64_handle_option (size_t code, const char *arg, >>>         if (!strcmp (arg, processor_alias_

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Andi Kleen wrote: > Steven Bosscher writes: > >>      case OPT_mfixed_range_: >> @@ -5245,6 +5247,13 @@ ia64_handle_option (size_t code, const char *arg, >>         if (!strcmp (arg, processor_alias_table[i].name)) >>           { >>             ia64_tune = proces

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

Steven Bosscher writes: > case OPT_mfixed_range_: > @@ -5245,6 +5247,13 @@ ia64_handle_option (size_t code, const char *arg, > if (!strcmp (arg, processor_alias_table[i].name)) > { > ia64_tune = processor_alias_table[i].processor; > + if (ia64_tune ==

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >> I can't find any test results in gcc-testresults reported with >> -mtune=itanium1 [1]. > > ...especially if theye do not even contribute test results or > feedback when things are broken (as in this case).  Deprecating > Itanium 1 with GCC

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

Gerald Pfeifer wrote: On Sun, 15 Mar 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote: I can't find any test results in gcc-testresults reported with -mtune=itanium1 [1]. ...especially if theye do not even contribute test results or feedback when things are broken (as in this case). Deprecating Itanium

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Sun, 15 Mar 2009, Steven Bosscher wrote: > I doubt there are many Itanium 1 machines left in use (production or > even for hobbyists). The only Itanium1 that reached the market was the > Merced, AFAIK. But only a few 1000s of these were sold, in 2000/2001. > Most of them are probably not running

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to propose that support for Itanium1 be deprecated for > GCC 4.4 and removed for GCC 4.5. ...and in case folks wonder why this comes up now: 1. Bootstrap with -mtune=itanium1 fails 2. Testing with a non-bootstrap

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > Note that I do not propose to add this sort of substantial target-specific > code change to my patch to remove deprecated targets/features > (currently > pending review for 4.5); I'l

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

Note that I do not propose to add this sort of substantial target-specific code change to my patch to remove deprecated targets/features (currently pending review for 4.5); I'll leave such removals to target maintainers (just as I did no

Re: Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Steven Bosscher wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to propose that support for Itanium1 be deprecated for > GCC 4.4 and removed for GCC 4.5. > > I doubt there are many Itanium 1 machines left in use (production or > even for hobbyists). The only Itanium1 that reached

Deprecating Itanium1 for GCC 4.4

Hello, I would like to propose that support for Itanium1 be deprecated for GCC 4.4 and removed for GCC 4.5. I doubt there are many Itanium 1 machines left in use (production or even for hobbyists). The only Itanium1 that reached the market was the Merced, AFAIK. But only a few 1000s of these were