[PATCH] wwwdocs: Note that old reload is deprecated

Paul Koning paulkoning@comcast.net
Wed Jan 11 18:42:22 GMT 2023



> On Jan 11, 2023, at 1:32 PM, Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 05:27:36PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> Am 11.01.2023 um 16:17 schrieb Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>:
>>>> Note this is more info for port maintainers not for users and
>>>> changes.html is for users.
>>> 
>>> And users will notice some ports will have to be removed, because those
>>> ports are not maintained / not maintained enough.  Some ports will not
>>> work with LRA, most will be easy to fix, but someone will have to do
>>> that.  If no one does so the port works sufficiently well it will have
>>> to be removed before release.
>>> 
>>>> "In a future release" is also quite vague.
>>> 
>>> It's what we usually say in changes.html .  "In GCC 14" if you want?
>>> 
>>> I can add some stuff on how this will benefit users?
>> 
>> I guess listing the ports without LRA support might be a first step for clarification?
> 
> Every port has LRA support.
> 
> Some ports will not build later when we delete old reload, because they
> use some functions and/or data structures unique to that.

Or, as in my case, because building with LRA as the default triggers an ICE that I don't understand.  I posted a note to the GCC list about what I saw, but have received no reaction.

If anyone can help me understand how LRA can generate RTL with register choices that violate the constraints listed in the MD file, I would be grateful.

	paul



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list