This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [4.8, PATCH 0/26] Backport Power8 and LE support
- From: Bill Schmidt <wschmidt at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, dje dot gcc at gmail dot com, rguenther at suse dot de, ulrich dot weigand at de dot ibm dot com, amodra at gmail dot com, bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com
- Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 16:15:43 -0500
- Subject: Re: [4.8, PATCH 0/26] Backport Power8 and LE support
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1395257038 dot 17148 dot 2 dot camel at gnopaine> <20140319200518 dot GD1817 at tucnak dot redhat dot com> <1395262998 dot 3599 dot 7 dot camel at gnopaine>
On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 16:03 -0500, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 21:05 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> > I guess the most important question is what guarantees there are that it
> > won't affect non-powerpc* ports too much (my main concern is the 9/26 patch,
> > plus the C++ FE / libstdc++ changes), and how much does this affect
> > code generation and overall stability of the PowerPC big endian existing
> > targets.
> >
> > Jakub
> >
>
> The three pieces that are somewhat controversial for non-powerpc targets
> are 9/26, 10/26, 15/26.
I forgot to mention that these bits have all been upstream in trunk
since last autumn, so there's been quite a bit of burn-in at that level.
Obviously that is not the same as being burned in on 4.8, but it does
help provide a bit of confidence.
Bill
>
> * Uli and Alan, can you speak to any concerns for 9/26?
>
> * 10/26 hits libstdc++, but only in a minor way for the extract_symvers
> script; it adds a sed to ignore a string added for powerpc64le, so
> shouldn't be a problem.
>
> * 15/26 might be one we can do without. I need to check with Peter
> Bergner, who originally backported Fabien's patch, but unfortunately he
> is on vacation. That patch fixed a problem that originated on an x86
> platform. I can try respinning the patch series without this one and
> see what breaks, or if Peter happens to see this while he's on vacation,
> perhaps he can comment.
>
> For PowerPC targets, I have already checked out powerpc64-linux (big
> endian). As David mentioned, I need to apply the patch series on an AIX
> machine and test it before this can be accepted. We don't have any way
> of testing the eabi stuff, so community help would be very much
> appreciated there.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill