From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5471 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2014 17:23:55 -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 5433 invoked by uid 89); 29 Apr 2014 17:23:54 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS,URIBL_SBL autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-oa0-f53.google.com Received: from mail-oa0-f53.google.com (HELO mail-oa0-f53.google.com) (209.85.219.53) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 17:23:52 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id j17so606567oag.40 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:23:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=pxlwksFz/zyWJVQ7HTgposkVxSMxqKJVSsw7RxkWn7s=; b=LOMPiW++Woa3gd4Zr5sP2fK9XFtcrIRrFvByY6mN7na7bkbIQXuufao9/PSHA4EwIA fdqTNw+1+ma3D8akg8/5AcHqb6IM0+0EmrOe0QwRbagT5zACSNjjLOFwRb4YNsGQgTJw 9o0UoMXGfWO8AxXwP8kkoWfPcsOgK0oBZTE5rH9DrhI45RxArQ5xDEiOX3r9VsrDNKHU PFOGHQSrI7bGSdnRlnJ7vqB+KKFq1yBH7G1wqwzJGcz7ino6ZhSw+U/rCfi5amgniJHt qzAVljPvmzQrORkrqVn8H3k4PJL/6RvuzaMgiGHLToCibG30OU2k7G7eTP9KImL9STO0 URzw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmc4QKRnb1dyDK+jd29Uqd2PSasoL55suVE+ufrgyWomj/kVKGMjnroEB6KbQaa4ylAnhMr+ZYxT8RbE5KvVXxdDMEMhgWFs/etUl96EFdVC2p/IgkVANDrF+zTJQgMhakrRahikBEIM2XE2UsozrpWPcnXq3nXpK2Sv0htV+Qc/aJX0Njo6kLeBTO9D4E4NjwTduVvUHl06h4OwS4B+FTUJbZPPA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.165.73 with SMTP id yw9mr28279219obb.39.1398792230742; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.227.226 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:23:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <535FC71E.8070406@marino.st> References: <5352D100.9040108@marino.st> <53541A34.7050908@marino.st> <535FC71E.8070406@marino.st> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 17:25:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PING] Contributing new gcc targets: i386-*-dragonfly and x86-64-*-dragonfly From: Ian Lance Taylor To: John Marino Cc: gcc-patches , "libstdc++" , Binutils , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg02000.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:37 AM, John Marino wrote: > > Does anyone have any issues with this set of patches to add support for > the DragonFly targets? It's a blocker for other patches of mine that > have a more general benefit, but this (relatively simple) one has to go > in first. It's inconvenient, but patches are much more likely to be reviewed when they cover a separate part of the tree, as different people maintain different parts. I expect your libitm and libcilkrts could be approved trivially if you send them separately. The change to include/libiberty.h is fine. I don't understand the benefit of libgcc/enable-execute-stack-bsd.c. The code seems the same as the existing libgcc/enable-execute-stack-mprotect.c. All you are changing is omitting need_enable_exec_stack. If you just drop the FreeBSD constructor, you will get the behaviour you want. Ian