Re: Fw: GCC 4.2 Status Report (2006-06-04)

Re: Fw: GCC 4.2 Status Report (2006-06-04)

[Ayal Zaks]

> This status report has been a long time coming, for which I apologize.
>
> As fwprop is no longer on the table for 4.2, and as the vectorizer
> improvements seem to have stalled due to a combination of lack of review
> and Dorit's leave,

That is unfortunate. Dorit did make a sincere effort to prepare her patches
long ago (mid February) well before leaving, and Victor has been constantly
pinging for reviews, ready to address them.

Ayal.


> I think it's time to declare 4.2 feature-complete.
>
> That leaves us looking at regressions.  There are lots; presently 56
> P1s.  About half of those are new in 4.2.  So, we're not ready to create
> a 4.2 branch.
>
> Therefore, we need to make the mainline open for regression-fixes only
> to force ourselves to attack the open bugs.  Please consider the
> mainline operating under release-branch rules as of 12:01 AM Wednesday,
> California time.  That will give everyone a few days to check in any
> in-progress bug-fixes that are not regressions.
>
> At this time, I don't think it makes sense to set a 4.2 target branch
> date.  We have to see how fast the bug-fixing goes.
>
> --
> Mark Mitchell
> CodeSourcery
> mark@codesourcery.com
> (650) 331-3385 x713

Re: Fw: GCC 4.2 Status Report (2006-06-04)

[Richard Guenther]

On 6/6/06, Ayal Zaks <ZAKS@il.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > This status report has been a long time coming, for which I apologize.
> >
> > As fwprop is no longer on the table for 4.2, and as the vectorizer
> > improvements seem to have stalled due to a combination of lack of review
> > and Dorit's leave,
>
> That is unfortunate. Dorit did make a sincere effort to prepare her patches
> long ago (mid February) well before leaving, and Victor has been constantly
> pinging for reviews, ready to address them.

<rant>
Maybe you can look at some of the regressions of the vectorizer first,
instead of
adding new features without first addressing regressions?

This could build up some trust that the newly added code will actually
be maintained
in the future.
</rant>

For a quick bugzilla search, use the 4.2 regressions link on the
gcc.gnu.org page
and modify it to include "-ftree-vectorize" in the bug description.  I
count 3 P1 and
3 P2 regressions.

Richard.

Re: Fw: GCC 4.2 Status Report (2006-06-04)

[Ayal Zaks]

"Richard Guenther" <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote on 06/06/2006
16:58:27:

> On 6/6/06, Ayal Zaks <ZAKS@il.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > This status report has been a long time coming, for which I
apologize.
> > >
> > > As fwprop is no longer on the table for 4.2, and as the vectorizer
> > > improvements seem to have stalled due to a combination of lack of
review
> > > and Dorit's leave,
> >
> > That is unfortunate. Dorit did make a sincere effort to prepare her
patches
> > long ago (mid February) well before leaving, and Victor has been
constantly
> > pinging for reviews, ready to address them.
>
> <rant>
> Maybe you can look at some of the regressions of the vectorizer first,
> instead of
> adding new features without first addressing regressions?
>
> This could build up some trust that the newly added code will actually
> be maintained
> in the future.
> </rant>
>
> For a quick bugzilla search, use the 4.2 regressions link on the
> gcc.gnu.org page
> and modify it to include "-ftree-vectorize" in the bug description.  I
> count 3 P1 and
> 3 P2 regressions.
>
> Richard.


<rant>This is not entirely fair.</rant>

We regretfully have been neglecting PRs recently, partly because of dorit's
leave, but in the past we have always addressed PRs and maintained our
code.  During the time that PRs weren't being addressed by us we also
haven't submitted any new features to mainline.  In fact, if you check,
you'll find that when the features in question were submitted (around
February), we also gave a lot of attention to PRs.  Having said that, we
should and are looking into current PRs; we definitely have a strong
interest in seeing them resolved.

Ayal.