From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 76041 invoked by alias); 1 Dec 2017 15:43:15 -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 76027 invoked by uid 89); 1 Dec 2017 15:43:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,KB_WAM_FROM_NAME_SINGLEWORD,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=HTo:D*oracle.com, HContent-Transfer-Encoding:8bit X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 15:43:13 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81A058B137; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 15:43:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn-112-12.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.112.12]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E90E5C578; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 15:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [patch] remove cilk-plus To: Paolo Carlini , "Koval, Julia" , GCC Patches References: <4E89A029A0F8D443B436A5167BA3C53F42AD12C2@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> <7a7b6ee1-469f-4e9a-00ba-300565c5de9d@oracle.com> From: Jeff Law Message-ID: Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 15:43:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7a7b6ee1-469f-4e9a-00ba-300565c5de9d@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-12/txt/msg00051.txt.bz2 On 12/01/2017 03:28 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > > On 16/11/2017 16:33, Koval, Julia wrote: >> // I failed to send patch itself, it is too big even in gzipped form.  >> What is the right way to send such big patches? >> >> Hi, this patch removes cilkplus. Ok for trunk? > Now that cilkplus is gone I suppose we should clean-up Bugzilla about > that. Shall I go ahead and essentially close all the bugs we got? As > WONTFIX or what else? Let's agree on something. In principle we could > keep the regressions for the sake of the existing release branches but I > think we got very, very, few of those and anyway I don't see who gonna > work on that... Not sure if we have a policy in this space or not. If we don't then my vote would be for CLOSE/WONTFIX now. That seems to most accurately reflect state -- we're not going to be fixing any Cilk+ stuff on the trunk or in the release branches. jeff