From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
Cc: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>, nd <nd@arm.com>,
Andrea Corallo <Andrea.Corallo@arm.com>,
"gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
"jit@gcc.gnu.org" <jit@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Late-breaking jit features (was Re: [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: introduce gcc_jit_context_add_driver_option)
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190202153427.GD2135@tucnak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1549120723.29992.14.camel@redhat.com>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-02 15:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-01 0:00 [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: introduce gcc_jit_context_add_driver_option Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Late-breaking jit features (was Re: [PATCH][gcc] libgccjit: introduce gcc_jit_context_add_driver_option) David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Richard Biener
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
2019-01-01 0:00 ` Andrea Corallo
2019-01-01 0:00 ` David Malcolm
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=20190202153427.GD2135@tucnak \
--to=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=Andrea.Corallo@arm.com \
--cc=dmalcolm@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jit@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
/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).