From: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
To: Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>, Alexander Monakov <amonakov@ispras.ru>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Stabilize a few qsort comparison functions
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 19:26:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40b0eb5f-07e5-99d8-8a6e-1973571603d2@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ce3c46bb-57cf-bbb7-d965-c23e8e5c5b65@lauterbach.com>
On 06/13/2018 05:50 AM, Franz Sirl wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 2018-02-07Â Franz Sirl <franz.sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com>
>>>
>>> Â Â Â Â * ira-build.c (object_range_compare_func): Stabilize sort.
>>> Â Â Â Â * tree-sra.c (compare_access_positions): Likewise.
>>> Â Â Â Â * varasm.c (output_object_block_compare): Likewise.
>>> Â Â Â Â * tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c (group_compare_offset): Likewise.
>>> Â Â Â Â (struct iv_common_cand): New member.
>>> Â Â Â Â (record_common_cand): Initialize new member.
>>> Â Â Â Â (common_cand_cmp): Use new member to stabilize sort.
>>> Â Â Â Â * tree-vrp.c (struct assert_locus): New member.
>>> Â Â Â Â (register_new_assert_for): Initialize new member.
>>> Â Â Â Â (compare_assert_loc): Use new member to stabilize sort.
>> This looks pretty reasonable.  I don't think you've contributed much
>> recently, do you still have write access to the repository?
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> after Alexander Monakov's gcc_qsort changes, this patch is not necessary
> anymore. I've verified that with a backport (the 2 patches r260216 and
> r260222 applied cleanly) of gcc_qsort to the gcc-8-branch. The resulting
> powerpc-eabi crosscompilers produce no more unexpected differences
> between a Linux and a Cygwin host.
OK Good.
> Tested (same like with my patch) by comparing the -fverbose-asm assembly
> output on a complete rebuild of the software here.
> So, unless someone thinks one of the changes makes sense anyway, this
> patch is obsolete.
Let's drop then.
>
> On the repository write access, yes, I don't have one anymore. But
> before reactivating that I need to do the legal paperwork, because
> unless before when GCC was a strictly private pet project for me, it now
> is work related. I already got permission from my company for that, just
> need to find some spare time to start the legal stuff.
Understood. Good to have you back!
jeff
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-13 19:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-07 16:58 Franz Sirl
2018-02-08 15:33 ` Martin Jambor
2018-06-12 21:49 ` Jeff Law
2018-06-13 11:50 ` Franz Sirl
2018-06-13 12:47 ` Alexander Monakov
2018-06-13 19:26 ` Jeff Law [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=40b0eb5f-07e5-99d8-8a6e-1973571603d2@redhat.com \
--to=law@redhat.com \
--cc=Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com \
--cc=amonakov@ispras.ru \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=mjambor@suse.cz \
/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).