New Port for RISC-V v3

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 10:38:18AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> There have been a handful of changes since we submitted our v2 port:
> 
>  * Some documentation formatting fixes.
> 
>  * A documentation typo fix.
> 
>  * Some changes to wwwdocs, which have been mailed to the list.
> 
>  * The port now builds via contrib/config-list.mk.  I worked around the
>    warnings in other parts of the codebase with some "#pragma GCC diagnostic
>    ignored" when I couldn't fix them properly, so the patches aren't useful,
>    but I fixed the warnings in our port reasonably.  I can try to fix all these
>    reasonably, but it might take a while.
> 
> As far as I know there are currently no outstanding problems with this port, so
> I think it's at the point where we should talk about actually getting the code
> in.  We have been accepted as maintainers of the port, and I have write access
> to the repositories, so I think we're all good to go on that end.  Of course if
> there's any remaining comments I'd love to fix them, but it seems the comments
> on our v2 were somewhat minimal.
> 
> What's the procedure for moving forward with the port?
> 
> Thanks to everyone who helped with reviewing the port!
> 
> [PATCH 1/6] RISC-V Port: gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c
> [PATCH 2/6] RISC-V Port: gcc
> [PATCH 3/6] RISC-V Port: libgcc
> [PATCH 4/6] RISC-V Port: libatomic
> [PATCH 5/6] RISC-V Port: gcc/testsuite
> [PATCH 6/6] RISC-V Port: contrib

Richard in another mail said he is ok with the patchset, Sandra said some
notes on the documentation patch and have seen just 5 of these 6 patches
posted in v3 (the 2/6 patch is missing).
>From RM POV as long as it doesn't affect other targets it is ok for trunk,
but please don't delay it too much (i.e. resolve Sandra's comments, post the
missing patch, then check it in).

	Jakub