On Mon, 15 Jan 2018, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 13/01/18 00:16, Jeff Law wrote: > > On 01/12/2018 04:07 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > > > On Fri, 12 Jan 2018, Jeff Law wrote: > > > > > > > I was going to suggest deprecation for gcc-8 given how badly it was > > > > broken in gcc-7 and the lack of maintenance on the target. > > > While we're considering deprecations, what happened to the idea of setting > > > a timescale by which cc0 targets need to be converted away from cc0 or be > > > removed? > > I don't think we ever really hashed through what that might look like. > > > > I'd be comfortable saying gcc-8 is the deprecation point. I know some > > folks won't like that (someone already said so WRT the m68k, but didn't > > step up to do the conversion), but I think that unless we set a point > > nothing is likely to happen. > > How much work is it to convert the m68k to LRA. Is this person days, weeks, > months or years?
My understanding is that moving away from cc0 is much more work than moving to LRA once you've moved away from cc0 (both moves are desirable to modernize a port, the move away from cc0 needs to be done first). But I don't have any more specific estimates. https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CC0Transition https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/LRAIsDefault -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
