This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
- From: Umesh Kalappa <umesh dot kalappa0 at gmail dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 20:17:08 +0530
- Subject: Re: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84762
- References: <CAGfacvR-LJbkXGTET2x5zmN67pPigoUkpdwLSxZJurVYpBHNxA@mail.gmail.com> <20181211122831.GS12380@tucnak>
Thank you Jakub for the information.
Will make a note of it.
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018, 17:58 Jakub Jelinek <email@example.com wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 05:30:48PM +0530, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > Please find the attached patch for the subjected issue .
> > Do please let me know your thoughts and comments on the same .
> Not a patch review (will defer that to rs6000 maintainers), but
> some comments on gcc-patches patch submissions.
> The subject should ideally start with [PATCH] or similar,
> then have some short summary of what the patch is about and if
> it fixes some PR, just PR something/12345 reference,
> the subjects you are posting like:
> don't say anything relevant except for the PR 84762 number,
> so anyone reading gcc-patches needs to open that bug in order to even find
> out if it is something for him or somebody else.
> If you are sending a patch for an area that has some maintainer(s),
> usually you should either mention those maintainers in To: (and CC:
> gcc-patches) or To: gcc-patches, CC: the maintainers, to draw their
> attention. See MAINTAINERS file in GCC tree.
> The mail body should start with a short explanation of what the problem is
> and how are you solving it, again, so that people don't have to jump to
> bugzilla to find out (of course, short is enough, no need to duplicate
> dozens of comments from the PR), should include information on what
> target(s) it has been bootstrapped/regtested. And, it is always better if
> it is the patch author that posts it, or is at least CCed so that he can
> answer review questions.