This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH][i386]Fix PR 57756
- From: Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google dot com>
- To: David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Sriraman Tallam <tmsriram at google dot com>, Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, David Edelsohn <dje at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 19:40:21 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH][i386]Fix PR 57756
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAAs8HmztsmmpUNucXECgDd-GDjKGv-2CWwFMFC5=LUNeyasaZg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8Hmz1qS4ZvpN-jU96Y4h2QhpWwOAQ2iEuwyjHUXOoPGMJ5w at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAFiYyc2y5-6j5wqhgz30y4ZvZgMvekPwxTdxy7kt_0s=rpD+CA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8HmzaRuskG1AcVEmiYuVQCNzXp8kjY5oMTTdhhDhG5juJ5g at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8Hmy7bU2fMRqtRUiX76EEe4Ma8NBdnPsbWCAJz5zAof8oLg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8Hmy0H4VB-0mJx_4=OE1eyMbSm7Lo40kcWi42CQzymtYU4Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAFULd4YguDhSbUtoEU+Qw60HoKkw+64s9hEJTcAv-9dGxdOy+Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAAs8Hmxt8TEN8ZWF1WuhHkTY9faa1wH12FtHUJOVa-UTm54D0Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131016055411 dot GJ20756 at bubble dot grove dot modra dot org> <CAAs8HmyL=7ZgsiPGK=ZUh6j3PWudi3i_FObR3_0Yr3YkBfVBXw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131016231314 dot GA16300 at ibm-tiger dot the-meissners dot org> <CAAs8HmzdmE1w9hGzR4BVo9dFw9JkuUiJ7j1SNXYYXrAh+9J50Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAGWvny=gRGugwLbFCHpSJhdFgTYOUKbDk6jXaOb=P+UfY+RyFg at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:06 PM, David Edelsohn <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Sriraman Tallam <email@example.com> wrote:
>> I was unable to build a native powerpc compiler. I checked for
>> build_target_node and build_optimization_node throughout and changed
>> rs6000 because it had references. I did not realize
>> function_specific_save and function_specific_restore have to be
>> changed. Sorry for breaking it.
> As Mike replied, gcc110 is available. Richard Biener's approval was
> dependent upon successful bootstrap and passing the regression
> testsuite, which you did not even attempt, nor did you try to build a
This is an oversight. I agree that it is better to test on multiple
platforms for large changes like this. In the past, Sri has been very
attentive to any fallouts due to his changes, so is this time.
>You also did not contact the rs6000 maintainer (me)
> nor the last person who changed the code in question (Mike).
You can count on us to send more patches your way for testing in the future :)
> How is Google going to change its patch commit policies to ensure that
> this does not happen again?
I am not sure what you mean here. We only have one policy to follow
for trunk GCC -- GCC's own policy.
> Thanks, David