This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Backporting Patches to GCC 7
- From: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at dabbelt dot com>
- To: richard dot guenther at gmail dot com
- Cc: jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 17:31:05 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: Backporting Patches to GCC 7
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
On Tue, 09 May 2017 01:50:42 PDT (-0700), firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Jonathan Wakely <email@example.com> wrote:
>> 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.
> Generally all maintainers can also approve backports.
OK, thanks. Since the RISC-V port is so new I'd like to be a bit aggressive
about backporting our fixes. If this goes anything like binutils did, there's
going to be a handful of bug fixes that trickle in over the next few weeks as
more people start using the port now that there's a release. For example,
we've got a few patches in the pipeline that get our -mcmodel=medany working
passing the test suite.
Is it OK if I pretty much just backport everything RISC-V related to
gcc-7-branch, as long as it doesn't touch any other port? I can ping you about
each patch if you'd like.