From: Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>
To: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>
Cc: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
"juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai" <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
"kito.cheng" <kito.cheng@sifive.com>,
"cooper.joshua" <cooper.joshua@linux.alibaba.com>,
Robin Dapp <rdapp.gcc@gmail.com>,
jkridner@beagleboard.org
Subject: Re: RISC-V: Support XTheadVector extensions
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2023 18:32:47 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+yXCZA2rh0G5LeX=TZ99brC7Droi9mc53fsYHF1nzmwqpvi9g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAeLtUDeHYcnBdMKw6yFs5GvZ3vazK-_1WRZvR8DtDJj2TWJbA@mail.gmail.com>
I guess it would be worth to state my thought publicly:
I *support* adding the T-head vector (a.k.a. vector 0.7) to upstream
GCC since T-Head vector already ships a large enough number of boards,
also it's not really T-head's problem as Palmer described in another
mail.
My biggest concern before is T-head folks didn't involved into
community work too much, so accept that definitely will increasing
work for maintainers, however I saw T-head folks is trying to
contribute stuffs to upstream now, so may not a concern now, also I
believe accept this patch will encourage they work more on upstream
together, which is benefit to each other.
Back to the one of the biggest issues for the patch set: GCC 14 or GCC
15. My general thought is it may be OK if it's less invasive enough,
then should be OK for GCC 14, but I don't have a strong opinion, since
as you know I am not the main developer of the vector part, so I will
let Ju-Zhe make the final decision, because he is the one who
contributes most things to RISC-V vector gcc support.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-18 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-17 11:39 juzhe.zhong
2023-11-17 16:47 ` Jeff Law
2023-11-18 9:45 ` Philipp Tomsich
2023-11-18 10:32 ` Kito Cheng [this message]
2023-11-18 15:16 ` 钟居哲
2023-11-20 3:04 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-11-20 16:58 ` Jason Kridner
2023-11-30 12:01 ` 回复:RISC-V: " joshua
2023-11-17 17:11 ` RISC-V: " Palmer Dabbelt
2023-11-17 23:16 ` 钟居哲
2023-11-18 0:01 ` Jeff Law
2023-11-18 0:04 ` 钟居哲
2023-11-28 19:45 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-11-28 22:14 ` Jeff Law
2023-11-18 9:11 ` Christoph Müllner
[not found] <202311171939484236058@rivai.ai>
2023-11-17 13:41 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-11-22 10:07 ` Christoph Müllner
2023-11-22 13:52 ` 钟居哲
2023-11-22 14:24 ` Christoph Müllner
2023-11-22 22:27 ` Jeff Law
2023-11-22 22:48 ` Kito Cheng
2023-11-22 23:37 ` Christoph Müllner
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='CA+yXCZA2rh0G5LeX=TZ99brC7Droi9mc53fsYHF1nzmwqpvi9g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=kito.cheng@gmail.com \
--cc=cooper.joshua@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=jkridner@beagleboard.org \
--cc=juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai \
--cc=kito.cheng@sifive.com \
--cc=philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu \
--cc=rdapp.gcc@gmail.com \
/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).