From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-x635.google.com (mail-pl1-x635.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::635]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F6963858D28 for ; Wed, 3 May 2023 15:13:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 2F6963858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-pl1-x635.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1aaf2ede38fso38714775ad.2 for ; Wed, 03 May 2023 08:13:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1683126806; x=1685718806; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jSvLEb2ymAAsCvr19rACzEpIZgt4DpXlOSZSTS00eXg=; b=njui7kJ48ORg5Qb6HY7AhLmH/YgqQu2yH2cM1UUzqPi8/6R0Q6ruIXGwNySB0ylj3H PGh5vXJqAFdQsELvGfjQcR6qpEJORBpSGRJAt0TXx4m8MW5MLws5g5x8UcUxLDbY5tmD Pe0E/eoWOf75jgFyndns5piCOb14HFDa0/VrkyCne6xRV8q+Cbv3YvnS1vR53kFpHoSW +dMFP3JmBBXDYP6fLuZdyItIkkvGgtlIkGl0EAkLxSbwxHZdM7xUbEtrdxOYQFUesIaf Uymu9cF36vzjmdJXPcTBxEi8A/0FKfGUYylzWRjoI1z4XlvvRKoCOIT89VOuKNu3oLj3 OMmw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683126806; x=1685718806; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=jSvLEb2ymAAsCvr19rACzEpIZgt4DpXlOSZSTS00eXg=; b=C5ETCczav6UrANBevZA1HPQ9e0Gp5QGqYxJU/+MAI1YmJMEWK15J2x2yQwv2dwIeTf Wdo9o4yfoEImG/+Zjvnnk1xTSiuEK6zhWRxPYFfttoD+RtPzitNVDReBJRwBe27M5AlI IEGUDhlU6qHtWmEDVTQDvZ5DiakcmZ37mmxH4rm46zK72p0ZJxmYFqegRCKRJvXQklYz /d/oIEnkxMzwiL9ymfwqRHVvPgdUyiU1jLZwgRtRaMrNOjO89VvlihJt0f2HHSBWemyA XKG3FkEQigN2t6FVeBD//vdyotnO8h1TEr1kNwN2sR5UC0Y+TT7XxQjQOljdAy1DsLBG ynMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDyTqDS/A18rcKs5ooX0RRmbRM0cC00WQgLs3+uxUc1Hk1k/LhcW YXjVgq1qvbW6VB1iAcnC/MA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4hMniB82XeJw+tPkrJvB6Ktz8rmGGgB4wtkfsiqEXUpNqnrfY5bTDNy9YoO155ImK+/2qbPA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b591:b0:1ab:8f4:af3a with SMTP id a17-20020a170902b59100b001ab08f4af3amr307535pls.39.1683126805855; Wed, 03 May 2023 08:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2601:681:8600:13d0::99f? ([2601:681:8600:13d0::99f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f1-20020a170902ff0100b001ab17dd739csm2077304plj.110.2023.05.03.08.13.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 03 May 2023 08:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 3 May 2023 09:13:23 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.1 Subject: Re: [committed] RISCV: Inline subword atomic ops Content-Language: en-US To: Palmer Dabbelt , richard.guenther@gmail.com Cc: Patrick O'Neill , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Kito Cheng , david.abd@gmail.com, schwab@linux-m68k.org References: From: Jeff Law In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: 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 >> 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