This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: Listing a maintainer for libcilkrts, and GCC's Cilk Plus implementation generally?


> I apologize. They got caught up in other issues. They've been merged into
> our mainstream and I believe they were just posted to the cilkplus.org
> website and submitted to GCC.

I'm going to submit latest cilk runtime sources next week so I will check the mentioned change.

Thanks,
Igor

> 
>   - Barry
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Schwinge [mailto:thomas@codesourcery.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2015 7:42 PM
> To: Jeff Law
> Cc: Zamyatin, Igor; Iyer, Balaji V; gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Tannenbaum, Barry M;
> H.J. Lu; Jakub Jelinek
> Subject: Re: Listing a maintainer for libcilkrts, and GCC's Cilk Plus
> implementation generally?
> 
> Hi!
> 
> On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 13:39:44 -0700, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 02/23/15 14:41, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:56:06PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 11:02:30 +0000, "Zamyatin, Igor"
> <igor.zamyatin@intel.com> wrote:
> > >>>> Jeff Law wrote:
> > >>>>> The original plan was for Balaji to take on this role; however,
> > >>>>> his assignment within Intel has changed and thus he's not going
> > >>>>> to have time to work on
> > >>>>> Cilk+ anymore.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Igor Zamyatin has been doing a fair amount of Cilk+
> > >>>>> maintenance/bugfixing and it might make sense for him to own it in
> the long term if he's interested.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> That's right.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks!
> > >>>
> > >>>> Can I add 2 records (cilk plus and libcilkrts) to Various Maintainers
> section?
> > >>>
> > >>> I understand Jeff's email as a pre-approval of such a patch.
> > >>
> > >> I think only SC can appoint maintainers, and while Jeff is in the
> > >> SC, my reading of that mail wasn't that it was the SC that has
> > >> acked that, but rather a question if Igor is willing to take that
> > >> role, which then would need to be acked by SC.
> > >
> > > Where are we on this?  Do we have a maintainer for Cilk Plus and its
> > > run-time library?
> > Not at this time.  There was a bit of blockage on various things with
> > the steering committee (who approves maintainers).  I've got a
> > half-dozen or so proposals queued (including Cilk maintainership).
> 
> What's the process then, that I get my Cilk Plus (libcilkrts) portability patches
> committed to GCC?  I was advisd this must be routed through Intel (Barry M
> Tannenbaum CCed), which I have done months ago: I submitted the patches
> to Intel, and -- as I understood it -- Barry and I seemed to agree about them
> (at least I don't remember any requests for changes to be made on my side),
> but I have not seen a merge from Intel to update GCC's libcilkrts.  Should I
> now commit to GCC the pending patches, <http://news.gmane.org/find-
> root.php?message_id=%3C8738bae1mp.fsf%40kepler.schwinge.homeip.net
> %3E>
> and following?
> 
> 
> GrÃÃe,
>  Thomas

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]