Re: [committed] PATCH for Re: Stepping down as maintainer for ARC and Epiphany

[Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>]

On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 6:21 PM Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5/21/24 8:02 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On May 21, 2024, at 9:57 AM, Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/21/24 12:05 AM, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 4:45 PM Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, 5 Jul 2023, Joern Rennecke wrote:
> >>>>> I haven't worked with these targets in years and can't really do
> >>>>> sensible maintenance or reviews of patches for them. I am currently
> >>>>> working on optimizations for other ports like RISC-V.
> >>>>
> >>>> I noticed MAINTAINERS was not updated, so pushed the patch below.
> >>> That leaves the epiphany port unmaintained.  Should we automatically add such
> >>> ports to the list of obsoleted ports?
> >> Given that epiphany has randomly failed tests for the last 3+ years due to bugs in its patterns, yes, it really needs to be deprecated.
> >>
> >> I tried to fix the worst of the offenders in epiphany.md a few years back and gave up.  Essentially seemingly innocent changes in the RTL will cause reload to occasionally not see a path to get constraints satisfied.  So a test which passes today, will flip to failing tomorrow while some other test of tests will go the other way.
> >
> > Does LRA make that issue go away, or does it not help?
> LRA didn't trivially work on epiphany.  I didn't care enough about the
> port to try and make it LRA compatible.

In that case LRA will make the issue go away (the port, that is ...).

Richard.

>
> jeff
>