This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3.3 PATCH: Add PNI support
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 04 Nov 2003 11:38:38 +0100
- Subject: Re: 3.3 PATCH: Add PNI support
- Organization: Integrable Solutions
- References: <20031031165650.GC666@lucon.org><m365i59s72.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net><20031031191211.GA2863@lucon.org>
"H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
| On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 07:29:21PM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
| >
| > | Those patches backported from gcc 3.3 have been checked into SuSE and
| > | Red Hat gcc 3.3 branches. We'd like to see Prescott New Instructions
| > | support in the official gcc 3.3 so that people don't have to get SuSE
| > | or Red Hat gcc 3.3 branches to use PNI with a stable gcc.
| >
| > HJ --
| > Please hold on. Is this fixing any regression?
| >
|
| It doesn't fix any regression. The issue here is usability.
Thank you for explaining the rationale behind this patch. and thanks
to other people who contributed to enlightening me.
In principle, I'm flexible about patches that go into 3.3.x. That
however does not mean that release branch is in development stage 2.
It still is a release branch, calling most of the time for regression
fixes. I'll accept non-regression fixes if
(1) it addesses serious problems; or
(2) most of the community feels it should go in.
In all cases, I need to understand why those non-regression fix
patches are being proposed for 3.3.x.
The patch is OK for 3.3.x. Thanks for your patience [I've on the way
to return back to home].
-- Gaby