From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 95188 invoked by alias); 29 Oct 2015 17:11:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 95141 invoked by uid 89); 29 Oct 2015 17:11:11 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:11:10 +0000 Received: from int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FED8345A81; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:11:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-113-196.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.196]) by int-mx13.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t9THB8mL016662; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:11:08 -0400 Subject: Re: PING: [PATCH] PR target/67215: -fno-plt needs improvements for x86 To: "H.J. Lu" , Bernd Schmidt References: <562F5E11.1090503@redhat.com> <562F739F.2090000@foss.arm.com> <562F818A.90003@foss.arm.com> <562F8B6F.7060605@foss.arm.com> <562F9B4C.8000607@foss.arm.com> <562FB812.7050601@redhat.com> <563166EC.8050903@redhat.com> <56317236.80602@redhat.com> Cc: Ramana Radhakrishnan , Jiong Wang , GCC Patches , Marcus Shawcroft From: Jeff Law Message-ID: <5632532C.1090907@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:15:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-10/txt/msg03237.txt.bz2 On 10/28/2015 07:14 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Bernd Schmidt wrote: >> On 10/29/2015 02:10 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Jeff Law wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> So I'll ask again, why did you commit a patch which you clearly knew did >>>> not >>>> meet the conditions Bernd set forth for approval? >>> >>> >>> I believed that aarch64 backend didn't properly handle -fno-plt, >>> which shouldn't block my patch. >> >> >> This really isn't how the rules work, and you've been around long enough to >> know it. >> > > Sometimes It seems that it is the only way to get attention from the > community. BTW, my patch was submitted in August. Again, speaking strictly for myself. -- That's unacceptable behaviour on your part. It doesn't matter if your patch was submitted 25+ years ago, yesterday or somewhere in between. Other folks ping, wait and find a way to work with the reviewers. Your solution was to violate the basic rules set for for commit privileges. What makes you special that allows you to break the rules? In my mind that kind of behaviour is anti-social and can't be tolerated in this community. -- jeff