Re: [PATCH] vect: Check that vector factor is a compile-time constant

[Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>]

On 3/23/23 20:28, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 16:18:20 PDT (-0700), jeffreyalaw@gmail.com wrote:

> 
> OK.  We don't have a hard need there, but it'll make life easier so I'm 
> happy to just treat it like a real shipping branch if you guys are going 
> to as well.
I'd planned to use it for Ventana's gcc-13 baseline since we're going to 
want RVV support before gcc-14 hits the streets.  So from Ventana's 
viewpoint is's like a real shipping branch.

> 
> Are you OK just having a single "gcc-13 with RISC-V performance 
> backports" branch, or do you want just vector backports?  Our internal 
> branch would be all performance-related backports, but no big deal if 
> the upstream stuff is vector-only as that's probably going to be 90%+ of 
> the churn.
I can live with performance backports.  It wasn't my original intent, 
but I see the benefits to the ecosystem.

> 
>> Thanks for raising the need for a development coordination branch.
> 
> I guess "need" is kind of strong: IMO it's up to the people actually 
> doing the work how to organize the branches.  I'm not writing the code 
> here so I'm happy with whatever, just pointing out that there's two 
> different things that could be done ;)
I think there's enough interested parties for the development side as 
well that ca;ling it a "need" isn't a significant stretch.

jeff