This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch, i386] PR 59422 - Support more targets for function multi versioning
- From: Allan Sandfeld Jensen <carewolf at gmail dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Gopalasubramanian, Ganesh" <Ganesh dot Gopalasubramanian at amd dot com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 16:17:23 +0100
- Subject: Re: [Patch, i386] PR 59422 - Support more targets for function multi versioning
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <201312151954 dot 38590 dot linux at carewolf dot com> <201312241538 dot 25574 dot linux at carewolf dot com> <CAMe9rOpCHcwUo1auftNGA8BAWaegLv4w8-F3Kj0ePbCW-moU4A at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Tuesday 24 December 2013, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
> Will libgcc/config/i386/cpuinfo.c update be a separate patch?
> Should we use a single definition for both i386.c and libgcc?
Currently they need to be in the same patch. But yes, moving the definition
out to a common header would probably be a good idea to reduce potential
mismatches in future.
How does the patch get commited after being accepted? It has been many years
since I last contributed to gcc, and I can not remember the rest of the
process, and doubt it is still the same.
Regards
`Allan