From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 54752 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2019 18:38:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jit-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: jit-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 54734 invoked by uid 89); 5 Feb 2019 18:38:02 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.100.2 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,KAM_SHORT,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=mid, paperwork, bumping X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,KAM_SHORT,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Feb 2019 18:38:01 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A718A59448; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 18:37:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ovpn-116-177.phx2.redhat.com (ovpn-116-177.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.177]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEE595C1A1; Tue, 5 Feb 2019 18:37:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1549391878.29992.19.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: Late-breaking jit features (was Re: [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: introduce gcc_jit_context_add_driver_option) From: David Malcolm To: Andrea Corallo , Jakub Jelinek Cc: Richard Biener , nd , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , "jit@gcc.gnu.org" Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:00:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20190202153427.GD2135@tucnak> References: <1549055472.29992.9.camel@redhat.com> <1549120723.29992.14.camel@redhat.com> <20190202153427.GD2135@tucnak> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.39]); Tue, 05 Feb 2019 18:37:59 +0000 (UTC) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-q1/txt/msg00057.txt.bz2 On Sat, 2019-02-02 at 16:34 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Sat, Feb 02, 2019 at 10:18:43AM -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > > > > Alternatively, should these patches go into a branch of queued > > > > jit > > > > changes for gcc 10? > > > > > > Is there anything like an ABI involved? If so we should avoid > > > breaking it all the time. Otherwise JIT is not release critical > > > and > > > thus if you break it in the wrong moment it's your own fault. > > > > The two patches each add a new API entrypoint, but libgccjit uses > > symbol-versioning to extend the ABI, without bumping the SONAME: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/jit/topics/compatibility.html > > So it's not an ABI break as such. > > I'd say it depends on how quickly the copyright paperwork can be > done, the > patch can't be added until that is resolved. While gccjit is not > release > critical, it would be nice not to break it late, so say if it can be > committed by end of February/mid March, I guess it is fine, given the > assumption we'd like to release mid April to end of April, if it > can't be > done by then, might be better to postpone to GCC 10. > > Jakub Jakub and Richard: thanks. I've double-checked the gcc_jit_context_add_driver_option patch and it looks good (it's a different patch that we're waiting on paperwork for). Andrea: are you able to commit this, or should I do this on your behalf? Dave