Re: [committed] RISCV: Inline subword atomic ops

[Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>]

On 5/3/23 08:14, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Wed, 03 May 2023 02:49:41 PDT (-0700), richard.guenther@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 8:33 AM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches
>> <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/2/23 14:34, Patrick O'Neill wrote:
>>> > Is this OK for a backport to GCC-13 as well?
>>> Let me sync with Richi & Jakub.  They're the release managers and this
>>> doesn't fall under the usual rules for things that can be backported.
>>
>> I would guess that most distros have these patches backported (SUSE has
>> that to both 12 and 13), so it wouldn't make much of a difference.  Since
> 
> That'd be my argument, too.  The distros that don't have this probably 
> have something scarier, like an implicit default to -latomic.
> 
>> this is backend specific and RISCV is neither primary nor secondary
>> it's up to the target maintainer discretion to bend the rules.
> 
> Fair, though we're trying to at least pretend we're playing by the 
> rules... ;)
So the net is let's backport this patch series to gcc-13.

jeff