Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GCC 11 Compiler Could End Up Removing Support For The Motorola m68k, Other Old CPUs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GrayShade
    replied
    Originally posted by cb88 View Post
    Sparc is "supported" but only just... there are a lot of bugs that don't get worked on a lot due to lack of interest. Also GCC 3.4 perhaps you meant 4.3 as that is what most BSDs will have as they never upgraded past that... 3.4 is pretty ancient at this point (14 years?).
    Eh, I was thinking of stuff like the Gaisler toolchain (they also seem to have a GCC 7.2 now). I think a lot of projects use customized compilers, not the official one.

    Originally posted by cb88 View Post
    Sparc is also probably architecturally inferior to say RISC-V or MIPS in that it relies on the antiquated and kludgy register windows that it inherited from the original RISC architectures and is now stuck with them for compatiblity.
    Ugh. Also, branch delay slots.

    Leave a comment:


  • DavidBrown
    replied
    Originally posted by jaskij View Post
    I bet that Microchip will step up and update that AVR backend as the MCU manufacturer. Just give them time to react. Unless they want to drop AVRs (they did drop a lot of MCUs when acquiring Atmel). Or the community will do it themselves.
    Microchip does not have a good track record on supporting gcc or other FOSS tools. In fact, they have a terrible record - their toolchain for the PIC32, which was gcc-mips with their own library, had optimisation disabled unless you paid significant sums for their commercial license. Atmel paid a couple of folks to maintain and develop gcc-based toolchains for the AVR, but no where near enough to cover the load - they relied solidly on community effort.

    The conversion from cc0 is not trivial - it is specialist stuff. It is not going to happen as a community volunteer effort. It will, I think, take many months of work - it will not happen unless Microchip pays for it to happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • cb88
    replied
    Originally posted by GrayShade View Post

    TBH, nobody is going to upgrade to GCC 11 for their XBox 360 or whatever. Most embedded projects use known-good toolchains from ages ago. Arduino has what, GCC 5.4? On SPARC platforms, GCC 3.4 is still going strong.
    Sparc is "supported" but only just... there are a lot of bugs that don't get worked on a lot due to lack of interest. Also GCC 3.4 perhaps you meant 4.3 as that is what most BSDs will have as they never upgraded past that... 3.4 is pretty ancient at this point (14 years?). Sparc is also probably architecturally inferior to say RISC-V or MIPS in that it relies on the antiquated and kludgy register windows that it inherited from the original RISC architectures and is now stuck with them for compatiblity.

    Last I checked at least 4.7 works fine on my sparc64 server and I think 6.3 or so was working. I personally haven't tested past that.

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    Typo:

    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
    From that list, the Motorla m68k still has some following

    Leave a comment:


  • gamerk2
    replied
    Originally posted by [email protected] View Post
    So they are saying that support for compiling on the Atari ST, Amiga and first gen Macs will be removed? This is a outrage!!!!!!1!


    /S
    I note the 68k uarch is still used for low-power microcontrollers, due to having good combination of low cost and low power usage, and "good enough" performance.

    If nobody maintains that code path to keep it up to modern standards, not doing so would be silly. If nobody steps up to keep m68k support code up to current requirements, they should remove it, as it's nothing but legacy baggage. Feel free to use an older version, fork it, or try to ensure m68k is properly supported.
    Define these "modern standards"; does the code path work or not? If the code path is still valid, then why would you choose to remove functionality that is still valid?

    Leave a comment:


  • bregma
    replied
    Originally posted by DrYak View Post
    I think the "sarcasm tag" is one of the few exception were the revival of the 90s "Blink element" would be justified.
    Quite a few people seem to have missed it.
    Sarcasm: the use of irony to mock or convey contempt. They missed it only because there was no obvious irony, only contempt.

    Leave a comment:


  • milkylainen
    replied
    Originally posted by GrayShade View Post

    TBH, nobody is going to upgrade to GCC 11 for their XBox 360 or whatever. Most embedded projects use known-good toolchains from ages ago. Arduino has what, GCC 5.4? On SPARC platforms, GCC 3.4 is still going strong.
    Does not mean squat. CPUs will be used for embedded purposes ages from now.
    I'm glad they're picking m68k up atleast. It's not like it's hard to build your own toolchain.
    I never use ages old GCCs unless I'm forced to by stupid.

    Leave a comment:


  • andyprough
    replied
    monraaf - "Read the mailing list discussion. People are actually stepping up to do that. Jeff Law has announced he would do it next year and he is basically the one who has the last word on this."
    Read the linked discussion before giving our opinions? We're Phoronix readers. We can't be bothered.

    Leave a comment:


  • edwaleni
    replied
    Originally posted by [email protected] View Post
    So they are saying that support for compiling on the Atari ST, Amiga and first gen Macs will be removed? This is a outrage!!!!!!1!


    /S
    Yeah, also my Cisco AGS, MGS and AGS Plus!! (from the 1990's)

    Leave a comment:


  • DrYak
    replied
    Originally posted by [email protected] View Post
    /S
    I think the "sarcasm tag" is one of the few exception were the revival of the 90s "Blink element" would be justified.
    Quite a few people seem to have missed it.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X