From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@codesourcery.com>
Cc: <libc-ports@sourceware.org>, <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
Doug Gilmore <Doug.Gilmore@imgtec.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] MIPS: IEEE 754-2008 NaN encoding support
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 23:24:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1309102319460.18202@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1309101029530.29360@tp.orcam.me.uk>
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> I infer you'd prefer to have this change committed even though the
> required kernel part isn't there yet, right? I have therefore set the
> minimum version required artificially to 10.0.0 so that this code is not
> accidentally activated on a kernel that doesn't support the 2008-NaN
> feature and put a FIXME note next to it. Please let me know if this is
> what you had in mind.
Yes, using 10.0.0 here seems reasonable.
More generally, that would also seem appropriate if a new architecture
port were submitted and approved before the kernel port is upstream.
Rather than require a strict ordering of components going upstream
(binutils, GCC, Linux kernel, glibc; GDB anywhere after binutils), lots of
unnecessary delays can be avoided by each component reviewing
independently, possibly in parallel, with the understanding that
incompatible changes may still be possible if a component you depend on
that's not yet upstream has such changes. (Because of circular
dependencies, you can't fully avoid that anyway; GCC for various
architectures includes information about signal frames produced by the
Linux kernel, for example.)
At the point when the kernel support goes upstream, the version in glibc
can then be changed to reflect the correct upstream kernel version (in the
case of new architecture ports, it's possible more __ASSUME_* macros may
also be defined, or conditionals removed, based on what was in the kernel
version that went upstream).
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-10 23:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-22 23:53 [RFC][PATCH] " Maciej W. Rozycki
2013-08-23 0:58 ` Rich Felker
2013-08-23 1:41 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2013-08-23 1:57 ` Rich Felker
2013-08-23 3:11 ` pinskia
2013-08-23 3:38 ` Rich Felker
2013-08-23 4:08 ` pinskia
2013-08-23 4:12 ` Rich Felker
2013-08-23 4:10 ` Rich Felker
2013-08-23 3:46 ` Rich Felker
2013-08-23 10:53 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2013-08-23 15:26 ` Joseph S. Myers
2013-09-05 22:47 ` [RFC][PATCH v2] " Maciej W. Rozycki
2013-09-06 16:24 ` Joseph S. Myers
2013-09-10 9:36 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2013-09-10 23:24 ` Joseph S. Myers [this message]
2013-09-16 15:14 ` [PATCH v3] " Maciej W. Rozycki
2013-09-16 15:26 ` Joseph S. Myers
2013-09-18 20:48 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.1309102319460.18202@digraph.polyomino.org.uk \
--to=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=Doug.Gilmore@imgtec.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=libc-ports@sourceware.org \
--cc=macro@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).