This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Regressions in 3.2

In message <20020515154255.A2579@disaster.basement.lan>, Phil Edwards writes:
 > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 07:16:40AM -0500, Brad Lucier wrote:
 > > From my point of view, part of the problem was that there were so many
 > > problems with the 3.1 sparc-solaris port that it wouldn't even bootstrap 6
 >  weeks
 > > before the proposed release date (this was not an isolated experience in
 > > the months and weeks leading up to the release) and it took what appeared 
 > to
 > > an outsider to be an enormous (and impressive) effort to clean up 3.1 to g
 > et
 > > it into reasonable shape for release.
 > > 
 > > Now, unfortunately, a lot of that effort may have to be repeated on the 
 > > mainline.
 > For the port-specific things, would it be feasible to just copy the 3.1
 > file back on top of the mainline files as a starting point?  I've never
 > worked hard on a port, so it's quite possible I'm talking out of my ass
 > here, but it seems like the 3.1 sparc code is now in much better shape
 > than what's on the mainline.
That's usually a bad idea -- for example, you'd stomp on the DFA
scheduler changes.

This is going to involve careful analysis of patches, both to the
backend and the front-end to identify and fix the regressions.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]