From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3146 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2009 16:46:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 3138 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Jun 2009 16:46:26 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from yw-out-1718.google.com (HELO yw-out-1718.google.com) (74.125.46.153) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:45:56 +0000 Received: by yw-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 5so494552ywm.26 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:45:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.36.77 with SMTP id s13mr558955ibd.1.1245343553683; Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:45:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4A3A6AD8.70207@caviumnetworks.com> References: <4A3A6AD8.70207@caviumnetworks.com> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: GCC and boehm-gc From: NightStrike To: David Daney Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, hans.boehm@hp.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-06/txt/msg00439.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:27 PM, David Daney wr= ote: > NightStrike wrote: >> >> Given the recent issues with libffi being so drastically out of synch >> with upstream, I was curious about boehm-gc and how that is handled. >> In getting gcj to work on Win64, the next step is boehm-gc now that >> libffi works just fine. =A0However, the garbage collector is in terrible >> shape and will need a bit of work. =A0Do we send those fixes here to >> GCC, or to some other project? =A0Who handles it? =A0How is the synching >> done compared to other external projects? >> > > Your analysis of the situation is essentially correct. > > Hans (now CCed) is good about merging changes to the upstream sources, > but we haven't updated GCC/libgcj's copy in quite some time. =A0A > properly motivated person would have to import a newer version of the > GC checking that all GCC local changes were either already merged, or > if not port them to the new GC (those that are not upstream should > then be evaluated to see if they should be). So it seems that boehm-gc is in the exact state as libffi. This is yet another example of why we shouldn't duplicate sources... Hans, would you be willing to bring boehm-gc up to speed so that we can start getting it to work for Win64? Without this, we obviously cannot add gcj to our list of supported compilers.