public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "wilson at specifixinc dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/15653] [3.4 Regression]: Gcc 3.4 ICE on valid code
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 22:23:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040623221154.2373.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040525193213.15653.hjl@lucon.org>


------- Additional Comments From wilson at specifixinc dot com  2004-06-23 22:11 -------
Subject: Re:  [3.4 Regression]: Gcc 3.4 ICE on valid code

On Mon, 2004-06-21 at 16:08, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> Gcc 3.4 has many Itanium 1 regressions. I think we should either remove Itanium
> 1 support or fix all regressions.

I find this very confusing.

I assumed that we can not remove Itanium1 support because
a) You re-added binutils support after I removed it.
b) You are reporting gcc bugs for it.

If we really can remove it, then why are you reporting all of these
bugs?  At the very least, you should mark them as minor problems so I
know that they aren't important.

The Itanium port has far more problems than there are people to fix
them.  Every time you report a bug you don't care about, you make this
worse.  People aren't going to volunteer to fix Itanium bugs just
because you report them.  All that happens is that you increase my work
load.  I've been spending time looking at these Itanium1 bug reports
because they seemed important to you.  Meanwhile, other important bugs
are going unfixed.  You are only hurting your own cause by diverting my
attention from more important problems if you really don't care about
the Itanium1 support.

Keep in mind that just because it is broken doesn't mean we have to
remove it.  Removing it is a big hammer.  There are easier solutions,
such as ignoring the problem for now, or disabling it, or adding an
error() call to document that it is broken.  If we just leave it alone,
maybe someone will volunteer to fix the problems 6 months from now. 
This won't happen if we just remove it.

If we do remove the support, then what exactly are we removing?  What
about the kernel support?  What about the binutils support?  Are there
other things affected, like glibc?  Are we removing all Itanium1
support?  Or are we just removing the DFA scheduler for Itanium1?  What
about people that still have Itanium1 machines?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15653


      parent reply	other threads:[~2004-06-23 22:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-05-26 14:07 [Bug target/15653] New: " hjl at lucon dot org
2004-05-26 14:15 ` [Bug target/15653] " hjl at lucon dot org
2004-06-01  6:00 ` wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-10 21:06 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-10 21:10 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-10 22:21 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-11 23:06 ` hjl at lucon dot org
2004-06-11 23:07 ` hjl at lucon dot org
2004-06-12 22:11 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-15 16:11 ` vmakarov at redhat dot com
2004-06-16  1:13 ` wilson at specifixinc dot com
2004-06-16 15:47 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-16 15:51 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-16 19:06 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-17  7:15 ` wilson at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-21 23:08 ` hjl at lucon dot org
2004-06-21 23:33 ` hjl at lucon dot org
2004-06-21 23:40 ` hjl at lucon dot org
2004-06-22  8:14 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-23 22:23 ` wilson at specifixinc dot com [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20040623221154.2373.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).