GCC Buildbot

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com
Wed Nov 27 13:56:44 UTC 2013

On 11/27/2013 5:10 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 11/27/2013 09:08 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> The --enable-threads GCC configure option can be controlled via
>> "gcc/config.gcc":
>> *-*-rtems*)
>>    case ${enable_threads} in
>>      yes) thread_file='rtems' ;;
>>    esac
>> Does it make sense to build RTEMS without the RTEMS thread model
>> enabled?

Yes. It makes sense to make it the default. I don't think this
matters much for C but it does for other languages including C++.

> IMO, it doesn't nor do I think it makes sense to build RTEMS with 
> --disable-posix.

For those writing C Classic API applications, there is no reason to
enable POSIX at this point.

That said, the community that does that may find themselves having to
enable POSIX if they move to SMP or C++.

> However, in the past, there had been strong resistance to make threading 
> the default or mandatory. because of the overhead it causes in RTEMS.

Where? Enabling POSIX threads adds a little overhead. But I don't
think GCC C really does.

>> The RSB and the RPM build infrastructure always uses the
>> "--enable-threads" option.
> I believe, hardly anybody has used a thread-disabled rtems-GCC for many 
> years nor have such thread-disabled GCCs seen much testing with RTEMS 
> and in GCC in general.
>> Why don't we make this to the default?
> You'd have to ask those who have been fighting this. I am all for it.
> Ralf
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-devel mailing list
> rtems-devel at rtems.org
> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel

Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available                (256) 722-9985

More information about the devel mailing list