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: Listing a maintainer for libcilkrts, and GCC's Cilk Plus implementation generally?

I apologize. They got caught up in other issues. They've been merged into our mainstream and I believe they were just posted to the website and submitted to GCC.

  - Barry

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Schwinge [] 
Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2015 7:42 PM
To: Jeff Law
Cc: Zamyatin, Igor; Iyer, Balaji V;; Tannenbaum, Barry M; H.J. Lu; Jakub Jelinek
Subject: Re: Listing a maintainer for libcilkrts, and GCC's Cilk Plus implementation generally?


On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 13:39:44 -0700, Jeff Law <> wrote:
> On 02/23/15 14:41, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 4:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek <> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:56:06PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 11:02:30 +0000, "Zamyatin, Igor" <> wrote:
> >>>> Jeff Law wrote:
> >>>>> The original plan was for Balaji to take on this role; however, 
> >>>>> his assignment within Intel has changed and thus he's not going 
> >>>>> to have time to work on
> >>>>> Cilk+ anymore.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Igor Zamyatin has been doing a fair amount of Cilk+ 
> >>>>> maintenance/bugfixing and it might make sense for him to own it in the long term if he's interested.
> >>>>
> >>>> That's right.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>>> Can I add 2 records (cilk plus and libcilkrts) to Various Maintainers section?
> >>>
> >>> I understand Jeff's email as a pre-approval of such a patch.
> >>
> >> I think only SC can appoint maintainers, and while Jeff is in the 
> >> SC, my reading of that mail wasn't that it was the SC that has 
> >> acked that, but rather a question if Igor is willing to take that 
> >> role, which then would need to be acked by SC.
> >
> > Where are we on this?  Do we have a maintainer for Cilk Plus and its 
> > run-time library?
> Not at this time.  There was a bit of blockage on various things with 
> the steering committee (who approves maintainers).  I've got a 
> half-dozen or so proposals queued (including Cilk maintainership).

What's the process then, that I get my Cilk Plus (libcilkrts) portability patches committed to GCC?  I was advisd this must be routed through Intel (Barry M Tannenbaum CCed), which I have done months ago: I submitted the patches to Intel, and -- as I understood it -- Barry and I seemed to agree about them (at least I don't remember any requests for changes to be made on my side), but I have not seen a merge from Intel to update GCC's libcilkrts.  Should I now commit to GCC the pending patches, <>
and following?


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