This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009
- From: Michael Meissner <meissner at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- To: Evgeniy Stepanov <eugeni dot stepanov at gmail dot com>, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google dot com>
- Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>, Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin dot s dot serebryany at gmail dot com>, Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo dot med dot uc dot edu>, Alexander Potapenko <glider at google dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Dodji Seketeli <dodji at redhat dot com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov at google dot com>, Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at zalov dot cz>
- Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 12:37:25 -0500
- Subject: Revert libsanitizer patches or fix 59009
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1383611584 dot 5700 dot 45 dot camel at otta> <CAGQ9bdyEu_io7ReR2HBbRdJQeHCtfidGVr85Fx4uZaS0XhCRGA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131105071912 dot GD27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <1383667034 dot 5700 dot 54 dot camel at otta> <1383674821 dot 5700 dot 57 dot camel at otta> <CABMLtrhAiLybgf422PvRiWA8oXk-_qFnVa9ZdYnSh6p1gLsz-g at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131105184531 dot GR27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <CABMLtrjhKwfaCUFvQbB1K3_7VMYXm+vb_wqHX8eaV-=D3BPKgQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131106115318 dot GZ27813 at tucnak dot zalov dot cz> <CABMLtriEBy9NcsU=Xi63sjcwz5GYdU8su=j9COq9ywOf3BGt8g at mail dot gmail dot com>
It has been a week since the libsanitizer patches were checked in, which broke
the PowerPC64 Linux system along with others (PR 59009 for powerpc). Please
revert these patches while you are working on proper fixes for all of the hosts
and targets.
Quoting from the GCC development plan:
Patch Reversion
If a patch is committed which introduces a regression on any target which the
Steering Committee considers to be important and if:
the problem is reported to the original poster; 48 hours pass without the
original poster or any other party indicating that a fix will be forthcoming in
the very near future; two people with write privileges to the affected area of
the compiler determine that the best course of action is to revert the patch;
then they may revert the patch.
(The list of important targets will be revised at the beginning of each release
cycle, if necessary, and is part of the release criteria.)
After the patch has been reverted, the poster may appeal the decision to the
Steering Committee.
Note that no distinction is made between patches which are themselves buggy and
patches that expose latent bugs elsewhere in the compiler.
--
Michael Meissner, IBM
IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460, USA
email: meissner@linux.vnet.ibm.com, phone: +1 (978) 899-4797