This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Defining a common plugin machinery
- From: "Grigori Fursin" <grigori dot fursin at inria dot fr>
- To: "'Taras'" <tglek at mozilla dot com>, "'Basile STARYNKEVITCH'" <basile at starynkevitch dot net>
- Cc: "'Brendon Costa'" <bcosta at avdat dot com dot au>, "'Hugh Leather'" <hughleat at hotmail dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "'Sean Callanan'" <spyffe at cs dot sunysb dot edu>, "'Cupertino Miranda'" <cupertino dot miranda at inria dot fr>, <clattner at apple dot com>, <iant at google dot com>, "'Taras Glek'" <taras dot judge at shaw dot ca>, "'Diego Novillo'" <dnovillo at google dot com>, "'Mike O'Boyle'" <mob at inf dot ed dot ac dot uk>
- Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 08:24:56 +0200
- Subject: RE: Defining a common plugin machinery
- References: <48CF93F7.8010901@google.com> <48CF9C94.9010809@starynkevitch.net> <48D0286D.8020302@mozilla.com> <48e33659.0c58560a.6454.7b17@mx.google.com> <48E37481.7040803@hotmail.com> <BLU142-DAV64A066DB0D1D85765DD4BC1420@phx.gbl> <BLU142-DAV87E6265C2FA71995506F8C1420@phx.gbl> <48E39F49.7000109@starynkevitch.net> <BLU142-DAV8B305E041FCFFDCCDAA8FC1420@phx.gbl> <48E4180C.90103@avdat.com.au> <48E45457.2090408@starynkevitch.net> <48E461CA.9030808@avdat.com.au> <48E46A64.9060406@starynkevitch.net> <48EA89AB.6080707@mozilla.com>
Thanks, Taras!
I slightly updated this page, i.e. we would like to be able to load plugins
through environment variables to be able to optimize programs transparently
as it is done in MILEPOST GCC (without Makefile modifications). By the way,
we plan to extend the Interactive Compilation Interface by the end of this year
to access most of the internal transformations, however it will be
based on the event and call-back mechanisms, which is similar to your
GCC API proposal so we shouldn't have lots of compatibility problems
if we later agree on the same plugin system...
Take care,
Grigori
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taras [mailto:tglek@mozilla.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 11:57 PM
> To: Basile STARYNKEVITCH
> Cc: Brendon Costa; Hugh Leather; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; 'Sean Callanan'; Cupertino Miranda;
> clattner@apple.com; iant@google.com; 'Taras Glek'; 'Diego Novillo'; Mike O'Boyle; Grigori
> Fursin
> Subject: Re: Defining a common plugin machinery
>
> Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> > <snip>
> > My hypothesis is that several plugin mechanisms for GCC already exist
> > (on some branches or somewhere else). If a small plugin patch has a
> > better chance to get accepted into the trunk, we should limit
> > ourselves to such a small thing. If big plugin machinery could be
> > accepted (I would prefer that) we should understand what would make
> > them more acceptable. In both cases, plugins have probably some
> > requirements defined by the future runtime license, which I don't know
> > yet.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GCC_PluginAPI
>
> I put up an API proposal. It's a result of the plugin API discussion at
> the GCC summit.
>
>
> Taras