Skip to content

Proposal to remove target support for GCC_CS and GCC_CR #1514

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
sg- opened this issue Jan 24, 2016 · 16 comments
Closed

Proposal to remove target support for GCC_CS and GCC_CR #1514

sg- opened this issue Jan 24, 2016 · 16 comments
Labels

Comments

@sg-
Copy link
Contributor

sg- commented Jan 24, 2016

I would like to submit a PR with some house cleaning. From what I've seen most current releases of Eclipse based IDEs are using GCC_ARM. Is anyone specifically using GCC_CS or GCC_CR and a current mbed lib release? If not I'd like to propose that we depreciate support for these as of Q1 2016. All releases for GCC would then consolidate on the GCC_ARM builds.

https://developer.mbed.org/questions/62188/Proposal-to-remove-target-support-for-GC/

@adamgreen
Copy link
Contributor

👍

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Jan 25, 2016

Thanks for sharing this before it gets removed. I'll keep an eye on this thread plus the one on mbed.

What we could do for the next release, for exporters, if anyone exports for GCC_CR/CS, we would add a warning or file that its being deprecated and removed in the next xxx revision.

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Jan 25, 2016

What about lpcxpresso? We got exporters, does it support gcc arm?

@toyowata
Copy link
Contributor

I believe the LPCXpresso exporter uses GCC_CR (GCC codered) target.

@sg-
Copy link
Contributor Author

sg- commented Jan 25, 2016

Is this for redlib or newlib? From the release notes of v7 "Support for ARM’s newlib-nano C library, which can significantly reduce code size, especially for C++ applications" so wondering if the exporters configured for v6 and not v7?

@toyowata
Copy link
Contributor

By default, the GCC_CR exporter support Newlib, not Newlib-Nano.
Developer can enable Newlib-Nano library in LPCXpresso IDE by following information:
https://www.lpcware.com/content/faq/lpcxpresso/newlib-nano-support

Therefore, existing GCC_CR exporter support all version of LPCXpresso IDE (v6, v7 and v8) and can be switched to use Newlib-Nano library if developer want to.

I have quick checked a binary size for final image:

  • mbed_blinky.bin (Newlib) : 32KB
  • mbed_blinky.bin (Newlib-Nano) : 28KB

@toyowata
Copy link
Contributor

Removing to the GCC_CR means LPCXpresso exporter will no longer support, right?

@sg-
Copy link
Contributor Author

sg- commented Jan 26, 2016

No - It means that only v7 and v8 would be supported and use newlib-nano or the stdlib shipped with arms gcc release

@toyowata
Copy link
Contributor

In my understanding, LPCXpresso exporter (codered.py) uses GCC_CR build target. How are we going to support LPCXpresso exporter without GCC_CR target then?
https://github.com/mbedmicro/mbed/blob/master/workspace_tools/export/codered.py

@sg-
Copy link
Contributor Author

sg- commented Jan 26, 2016

right so that would be updated to use GCC_ARM

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Jan 28, 2016

I am fine with this proposal. We could carry out this task in the February, send a removal pull request, test it in the online IDE if exporters are functional for lpcxpresso.

@toyowata
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@sg-
Copy link
Contributor Author

sg- commented Feb 11, 2016

#1535

Will do much more testing before making the CodeRed/LPCXpresso change to document any deprecation if any exists.

@ciarmcom
Copy link
Member

ciarmcom commented Aug 1, 2016

ARM Internal Ref: IOTMORF-222

@ciarmcom
Copy link
Member

ARM Internal Ref: IOTMORF-514

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor

Done. GCC_CR and GCC_CS are no longer in the codebase.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants