This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][ARM] use vsel instruction for floating point conditional moves in ARMv8
- From: Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>
- To: Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramrad01 at arm dot com>
- Cc: Matthew Gretton-Dann <matthew dot gretton-dann at linaro dot org>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Kyrylo Tkachov <Kyrylo dot Tkachov at arm dot com>, Richard Earnshaw <Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 12:45:25 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH][ARM] use vsel instruction for floating point conditional moves in ARMv8
- References: <001501cdfecb$a96ad720$fc408560$ at firstname.lastname@example.org> <5122159B dot 9050601 at arm dot com> <51506b94 dot 45d5440a dot 0a4f dot ffffd45aSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN at mx dot google dot com> <515C4E37 dot 4070502 at linaro dot org> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1304040945490 dot 21094 at zhemvz dot fhfr dot qr> <515D5106 dot 40808 at arm dot com>
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
> On 04/04/13 08:46, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, Matthew Gretton-Dann wrote:
> > > Would it be possible for this patch and the others Kyrylo has recently
> > > done
> > > for the new ARMv8 AArch32 instructions to be backported to 4.8?
> > >
> > > In particular I'm refering to:
> > >
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00994.html (trunk r197052)
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00874.html (trunk r197051)
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00873.html (trunk r197046)
> > Those seem to be new features and not regression fixes and thus are
> > not appropriate for a release branch.
> Not all of them really,
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00652.html is really a target bug
> fix which causes mild annoyance once a while. I do believe that Kyryll was
> looking at proposing a backport of this patch (and there is a bugzilla entry
> for this one.)
> I am sympathetic to the new atomics for v8-a and I've heard atleast one
> request for it privately (i.e. this one
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-03/msg00874.html) but I'd defer to the
> RM's on that one.
Please ask more specifically then. Note that release managers generally
defer to target maintainers for architecture specific patches. But we
of course expect them to follow the rule of fixing regressions
and wrong-code issues only. Exceptions are always possible but
strongly discouraged by us for primary and secondary targets where
new regressions may block a release.