From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20240 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 20230 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Apr 2004 21:03:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 3872 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:45 -0000 Received: from taltos.codesourcery.com (zack@66.92.218.83) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 3 Apr 2004 21:03:45 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:03:44 -0800 To: Caroline Tice Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Patches" Subject: Re: unreviewed patches References: From: Zack Weinberg Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 21:03:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Caroline Tice's message of "Thu, 1 Apr 2004 12:24:52 -0800") Message-ID: <87isggepu7.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-04.argh/txt/msg00202.txt Caroline Tice writes: > The following patches still need to be reviewed: > > New optimization, partitioning hot/cold basic blocks (It did pass > all the tests...) > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg01318.html> People raised a *lot* of concerns about this and it's not clear to me that they were all adequately addressed. > Clean up driver processing for IMA > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg02101.html This one is OK; however, please (as a followup) check into the interaction with the Java front end, which has similar capabilities. zw From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20240 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 20230 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Apr 2004 21:03:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 3872 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:45 -0000 Received: from taltos.codesourcery.com (zack@66.92.218.83) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 3 Apr 2004 21:03:45 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:03:44 -0800 To: Caroline Tice Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Patches" Subject: Re: unreviewed patches References: From: Zack Weinberg Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 14:21:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Caroline Tice's message of "Thu, 1 Apr 2004 12:24:52 -0800") Message-ID: <87isggepu7.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-04.cgf/txt/msg00202.txt Message-ID: <20040406142100.sLhxgJJu3ewb0MPJTLO6sk99bBq14oRAMkaXHFuG_2A@z> Caroline Tice writes: > The following patches still need to be reviewed: > > New optimization, partitioning hot/cold basic blocks (It did pass > all the tests...) > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg01318.html> People raised a *lot* of concerns about this and it's not clear to me that they were all adequately addressed. > Clean up driver processing for IMA > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg02101.html This one is OK; however, please (as a followup) check into the interaction with the Java front end, which has similar capabilities. zw From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20240 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 20230 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.6) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Apr 2004 21:03:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 3872 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2004 21:03:45 -0000 Received: from taltos.codesourcery.com (zack@66.92.218.83) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 3 Apr 2004 21:03:45 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:03:44 -0800 To: Caroline Tice Cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Patches" Subject: Re: unreviewed patches References: From: Zack Weinberg Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 20:06:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Caroline Tice's message of "Thu, 1 Apr 2004 12:24:52 -0800") Message-ID: <87isggepu7.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00202.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20040409200600.blMywNOoP1ZfM-QCf5vTLDyUD9p3aKwIwqSLXiRsdlY@z> Caroline Tice writes: > The following patches still need to be reviewed: > > New optimization, partitioning hot/cold basic blocks (It did pass > all the tests...) > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg01318.html> People raised a *lot* of concerns about this and it's not clear to me that they were all adequately addressed. > Clean up driver processing for IMA > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg02101.html This one is OK; however, please (as a followup) check into the interaction with the Java front end, which has similar capabilities. zw