[PATCH] avr: cc0 to mode_cc conversion

[abebeos]

On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 20:51, Georg-Johann Lay <avr@gjlay.de> wrote:

> > (I really tried to follow this
> https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#patches,
> > but my stomach)
> >
> > Hi there all!
> >
> > The attached patch contains a new avr-backend, stripped from cc0.
> >
> > The author is gcc maintainer Snethil Kumar Selvaraj (saaadhu),
>
> Hi, AFAIK Senthil has write-after-approval state.  The only avr
> maintainer, at least according to MAINTAINERS, is still Denis, cf.
>
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob;f=MAINTAINERS;h=32f8a2b72923b791f9687d6a2d555a1780535078;hb=HEAD#l59
>
> I allowed me CCing them.
>
> > the source can be found here:
> >
> > https://github.com/saaadhu/gcc-avr-cc0/tree/avr-cc0-squashed
> >
> > The gcc/g++ testsuites show zero regressions, tested with:
> >
> > https://github.com/abebeos/avr-gnu
> >
> > and confirmed with another testsetup, see:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-December/561489.html
> >
> > Some more background information within:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-December/561668.html
> >
> > and
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92729
> >
> > (i have this dark feeling that I did the patch submission wrong...
> pressing
> > Send anyways!)
>

(hey, "between us": where did my real-name came from in your email? I
choosed to appear here with an alias "abebeos" - not that it's difficult to
find my real name, but still, it's my choice...)


>
> Sometimes it's more convenient to have a .diff text file, but I don't
> see anything wrong with your submission.


ok

And what it really nice to
> have hunks defined for "(define_" or "^(define_") in your git diff
> setup.  That way it's easier to track in which entity of the machine
> description a change is located.  Just like when you have a change
> in the middle of a long C function, and the diff chunk spells out
> the C function in which it is located.
>

ok

> diff --git a/gcc/config/avr/avr-dimode.md b/gcc/config/avr/avr-dimode.md
>
[...] - (review)

Thank you for taking the time to review.

The author (currently not available) assessed the work as "semi working":

The (lets say) integrator (me), assessed the work as "good enough" - given
status of the gcc10 avr-backend this should be the prioriity (saving it
from extinction).

Possibly all details should be ignored for now, thus it can be merged.

My process/decision (given circumstances) is to "not touch even whitespace"
in the 0-regression-patch.

So, what remains for me now is to produce a tiny document for the
bounty-backers, and just hope that the folks here finds peace&wisdom to do
the right thing.

Over

a
n
d

Out!

.