Re: New Port for RISC-V v3

[Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at dabbelt dot com>]

On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:21:36 PST (-0800), jakub@redhat.com wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 10:38:18AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>> There have been a handful of changes since we submitted our v2 port:
>>
>>  * Some documentation formatting fixes.
>>
>>  * A documentation typo fix.
>>
>>  * Some changes to wwwdocs, which have been mailed to the list.
>>
>>  * The port now builds via contrib/config-list.mk.  I worked around the
>>    warnings in other parts of the codebase with some "#pragma GCC diagnostic
>>    ignored" when I couldn't fix them properly, so the patches aren't useful,
>>    but I fixed the warnings in our port reasonably.  I can try to fix all these
>>    reasonably, but it might take a while.
>>
>> As far as I know there are currently no outstanding problems with this port, so
>> I think it's at the point where we should talk about actually getting the code
>> in.  We have been accepted as maintainers of the port, and I have write access
>> to the repositories, so I think we're all good to go on that end.  Of course if
>> there's any remaining comments I'd love to fix them, but it seems the comments
>> on our v2 were somewhat minimal.
>>
>> What's the procedure for moving forward with the port?
>>
>> Thanks to everyone who helped with reviewing the port!
>>
>> [PATCH 1/6] RISC-V Port: gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c
>> [PATCH 2/6] RISC-V Port: gcc
>> [PATCH 3/6] RISC-V Port: libgcc
>> [PATCH 4/6] RISC-V Port: libatomic
>> [PATCH 5/6] RISC-V Port: gcc/testsuite
>> [PATCH 6/6] RISC-V Port: contrib
>
> Richard in another mail said he is ok with the patchset, Sandra said some
> notes on the documentation patch and have seen just 5 of these 6 patches
> posted in v3 (the 2/6 patch is missing).
> From RM POV as long as it doesn't affect other targets it is ok for trunk,
> but please don't delay it too much (i.e. resolve Sandra's comments, post the
> missing patch, then check it in).

OK, great!  I think we're all set:

 * Here's the responses to the documentation comments
   <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg00459.html>,
   <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg00460.html>.

 * I believe the patch was silently dropped because it was over the size
   limits, so I gzip'd the patch and sent it to the mailing list here
   <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg00462.html>.

 * We don't touch anything in any of the other ports.

If you give the OK, then I can commit this as soon as I figure out git-svn
(which I'm looking at now).

Thanks!