This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Backporting Patches to GCC 7
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at dabbelt dot com>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 21:00:13 +0100
- Subject: Re: Backporting Patches to GCC 7
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <mhng-efff0fe7-8cc3-4202-a38a-0f3a2588c666@palmer-si-x1c4>
On 5 May 2017 at 21:35, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> I just submitted two patches against trunk. I'd like to also have them on the
> 7 branch, so when 7.2 comes out we'll have them. These patches only touch the
> RISC-V backend, which I'm a maintainer of. Is there a branch maintainer I'm
> supposed to have sign off on the patches or am I meant to just decide on my own
> what I should commit?
> For reference, here's the patches
> 284b54c RISC-V: Add -mstrict-align option
> 70218e8 RISC-V: Unify indention in riscv.md
In general, backports that aren't fixing regressions or documentation
would need release managers approval. There's some leeway for target
maintainers of ports and other subsystems, for example I sometimes
make executive decisions about the C++ runtime libraries when the
backport only affects an isolated part of the library, or is clearly
safe and an obvious improvement. For bigger changes that aren't
regressions but I'd like to backport I still seek RM approval.
I would guess that for RISC-V which is new in 7.1, if you think the
backport is important and it doesn't affect other targets then it
should be OK.
Maybe one of the release managers can confirm that though.