[OE-core] [PATCH] gcc-6.3: Backport patch to fix ICE on ARM

[Khem Raj]

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Andre McCurdy <armccurdy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Khem Raj <raj.khem at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Andre McCurdy <armccurdy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Khem Raj <raj.khem at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Fixes
>>>> internal compiler error: Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is achieved (90)
>>>
>>> Is there a plan to update gcc 6.3 -> 6.4 in OE 2.5?
>>
>> actually, I was thinking of not touching 6.x at all since it solely
>> for backward compatibility
>> so upgrading it might cause issues for users
>
> gcc 6.3 to 6.4 isn't really an upgrade in the sense of any new
> features, it's just bug fixes, some of which look somewhat important:
>
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=RESOLVED&resolution=FIXED&target_milestone=6.4
>
> Since gcc 6.x is now well into the maintenance phase, I'd be inclined
> to think that the risk -vs- reward odds of taking these upstream fixes
> is pretty good.

I think we understand that its a bug fix only, however, upstream is not
validating gcc 6.x releases against OE-Core, and OE community isnt
doing that either. Invariably, while low, there are chances
of regressions specific to OE

>
>>, and since we do not test
>> it actively, we would
>> not know them. I would rather keep it to the version we have once
>> tested but I am open
>> to maintaining an upgraded version if community thinks that is
>> beneficial for them. there
>> wont be any testing on it in 2.5 release cycle,
>
> Just having the upgrade available to the community is useful, even if
> there are no guarantees or testing. I've backporting gcc 6.3 into my
> morty branch as it fixes build issues with musl. Morty with gcc 6.3 is
> not a combination which was ever officially supported or tested
> upstream, but I very much appreciate the fact that upgrading gcc 6.2
> to 6.3 in morty only requires a few cherry-picks :-)

I am open for if there are more like minded folks who think this will be a good
thing to have. so all listening please chime in

>
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem at gmail.com>
>>>> ---