From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com>
Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
Andrew Jenner <andrew@codesourcery.com>,
David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>,
GCC Development <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
Olivier Hainque <hainque@adacore.com>,
Sandra Loosemore <sandra@codesourcery.com>,
Arnaud Charlet <charlet@adacore.com>,
Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
Subject: Re: PowerPC SPE maintainership (was Re: Obsolete powerpc*-*-*spe*)
Date: Mon, 01 May 2017 16:11:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170501161112.GN19687@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <672bb7fd-e2dd-85a4-ad05-c6cce47b7223@oarcorp.com>
On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 10:55:53AM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >powerpc-*-rtemsspe* would be OK.
> >
> >powerpc-*-eabisimspe* is pretty ugly though.
>
>
> After I sent this, I saw in another response that powerpcspe*-*-*
> was proposed. Is that clearer?
Yes, it does not have part of the architecture name in the OS field ;-)
We can support both: we need to support powerpc*-*-*spe* because that
is what people use today, but we can support powerpcspe-*-* as well.
> For rtems, we already used versioned triplets. powerpc-rtems4.12
> for example. owerpcspe-rtems4.12 seems more correct because spe
> is part of the CPU architecture.
>
> Otherwise, would it be powerpc-rtems4.12spe or powerpc-rtemsspe4.12.
> Both of those are pretty ugly and confuse the third part.
I agree. People wanting to match either can use powerpc*-x-x (which
they likely already have because of powerpc64, powerpc64le, powerpcle!)
So if you need to define a new target triple anyway, powerpcspe-*-*
is probably the way to go.
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-01 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-14 3:08 Obsolete powerpc*-*-*spe* Segher Boessenkool
2017-02-14 6:32 ` Jeff Law
2017-02-14 11:55 ` Sebastian Huber
2017-02-14 14:09 ` David Brown
2017-02-14 14:26 ` Sebastian Huber
2017-02-14 14:49 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-02-16 5:28 ` Patrick Oppenlander
2017-02-16 17:00 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-02-16 5:43 ` Patrick Oppenlander
2017-02-14 13:45 ` David Edelsohn
2017-02-15 0:06 ` PowerPC -many Alan Modra
2017-02-15 0:38 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-02-15 1:04 ` Alan Modra
2017-02-15 6:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2017-02-15 12:35 ` David Edelsohn
2017-02-15 3:03 ` Peter Bergner
2017-02-14 16:04 ` Obsolete powerpc*-*-*spe* Olivier Hainque
2017-02-16 21:49 ` Sandra Loosemore
2017-02-16 22:19 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-02-16 23:54 ` Sandra Loosemore
2017-02-17 0:11 ` David Edelsohn
2017-02-17 9:19 ` Richard Biener
2017-02-17 9:38 ` Janne Blomqvist
2017-02-17 14:12 ` Nathan Sidwell
2017-02-20 20:08 ` Olivier Hainque
2017-02-21 16:14 ` David Edelsohn
2017-02-23 9:23 ` Olivier Hainque
2017-02-23 9:36 ` Arnaud Charlet
2017-03-13 18:02 ` Andrew Jenner
2017-03-15 10:01 ` Olivier Hainque
2017-03-15 14:26 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-03-15 16:16 ` Olivier Hainque
2017-03-15 17:13 ` Sandra Loosemore
2017-03-15 17:36 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-03-15 17:45 ` David Edelsohn
2017-03-15 21:43 ` Andrew Jenner
2017-03-16 19:25 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-03-16 20:38 ` Andrew Jenner
2017-03-16 21:11 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-03-16 21:16 ` Andrew Jenner
2017-03-17 7:58 ` Sebastian Huber
2017-03-30 16:41 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2017-04-26 9:19 ` PowerPC SPE maintainership (was Re: Obsolete powerpc*-*-*spe*) Andrew Jenner
2017-04-28 23:15 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-04-29 16:28 ` Jeff Law
2017-05-01 10:48 ` Joseph Myers
2017-05-01 11:12 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-05-01 11:31 ` Joseph Myers
2017-05-01 11:45 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-05-01 15:47 ` Joel Sherrill
2017-05-01 15:56 ` Joel Sherrill
2017-05-01 16:11 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2017-05-01 16:12 ` Arnaud Charlet
2017-05-01 16:25 ` Segher Boessenkool
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170501161112.GN19687@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=andrew@codesourcery.com \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=charlet@adacore.com \
--cc=dje.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hainque@adacore.com \
--cc=joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=sandra@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).