This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Update Stage 4 description
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast dot net>
- Cc: Tom de Vries <tdevries at suse dot de>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Biener <rguenther at suse dot de>, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 16:33:46 +0000
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Update Stage 4 description
- References: <869742ac-5f7e-7673-48c4-f393a1e2eb65@suse.de> <846F367A-8DFA-43DC-B0C5-EBFFB068628C@comcast.net>
On Wed, 9 Jan 2019, Paul Koning wrote:
> Is there, or should there be, a distinction between primary and
> non-primary platforms? While platform bugs typically require fixes in
> platform-specific code, I would think we would want to stay away from
> bugfixes in minor platforms during stage 4. The wording seems to say
> that I could fix wrong-code bugs in pdp11 during stage 4; I have been
> assuming I should not do that. Is this something that should be
> explicitly stated?
In target-specific code for a minor target you can more or less do as you
want - but the decision on when to branch won't take account of what
you're doing for a minor target, so any major work runs the risk of the
branch happening at an unstable point in the middle of that work.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com