From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 73951 invoked by alias); 19 May 2015 15:33:25 -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 73619 invoked by uid 89); 19 May 2015 15:33:25 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 19 May 2015 15:33:24 +0000 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1YujWC-0007fa-CV from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Tue, 19 May 2015 08:33:20 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.224.2; Tue, 19 May 2015 16:33:18 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1YujW9-0001aV-HU; Tue, 19 May 2015 15:33:17 +0000 Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 15:37:00 -0000 From: Joseph Myers To: "H.J. Lu" CC: Magnus Granberg , GCC Patches Subject: Re: PING^3: [PATCH]: New configure options that make the compiler use -fPIE and -pie as default option In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <3072346.CTCrhcXNep@laptop1.gw.ume.nu> User-Agent: Alpine 2.10 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg01712.txt.bz2 On Tue, 19 May 2015, H.J. Lu wrote: > > I think the whole thing should be posted as one patch, with both the > > target-independent changes and the target-specific changes for all > > targets. > > > > That is what makes me concerned. I have some simple target-specified > patches which weren't reviewed for years. What will happen if no one For any unreviewed patch, keep pinging weekly. > reviews some simple target-specified changes due to > > 1. Reviewers don't have access to those targets. > 2. Target maintainers aren't review them. > 3. There are no clear maintainers for those targets. I've already said in that, given target maintainers CC:ed, I might be inclined to approve the patch on the basis of allowing them a week to test their target changes. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com