<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hi<br>
<br>
Does the RTEMS Community have interest in any gcc PRs that<br>
have fixes for 4.8 being backported to 4.7?<br>
<br>
If so, let me know so those requests are represented.<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
<br>
--joel<br>
<div class="moz-forward-container"><br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Subject:
</th>
<td>more 4.7 backports?</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Date: </th>
<td>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 22:56:54 -0500</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">From: </th>
<td>Kenny Simpson <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:theonetruekenny@yahoo.com"><theonetruekenny@yahoo.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">To: </th>
<td><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org">gcc@gcc.gnu.org</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org"><gcc@gcc.gnu.org></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<pre>Last month I sent a list of bugreports that were 4.7 regressions, but had patches which fixed them for 4.8. It looks like ~7 of these had been backported and 10 more bugreports now exist with potential for backporting as well.
Here are my rough notes:
backported:
44061 - diagnostic
54767 - wrong-code
55043 - rejects-valid
55107 - compile-time-hog
55660 - [lto] ice-on-invalid
55890 - ice-on-invalid
53844 - missed-optimization (fixed back in July and waiting to see if any fallout?) - looks like it was backported, but then reverted?
some discussion on...
54073 - missed-optimization 'not planning to backport it right now.'
update: "I have moved this discussion to PR56309. Let's keep this PR open for eventual
backport of the patch in Comment #13 to 4.7 branch."
Not much activity on the remaining:
35634 - bad-code, however 'Unlikely going to be backported.'
43961 - [arm] target
48189 - ice-on-valid
48766 - ice-on-valid
51447 - wrong-code, however 'Could be back-ported, but IMHO this issue is not important enough for that so I'm not going to work on back-ports.'
53636 - wrong-code
53676 - missed-optimization (discussion about 4.7 backport after some more 4.8 exposure since August)
54051 - [arm] wrong-code?
54295 - wrong-code
54563 - ice-on-valid - already backported? ***
54919 - wrong-code, however 'no plans to work on back-ports of my patch for the release branches'
54974 - [arm] wrong-code (last comment was asking about 4.7 backport)
55018 - wrong-code
55614 - alignment issue/tree-optimization
55964 - ice
New bug reports with potential backports:
56077 - wrong-code "Fixed on trunk, needs to be ported to 4.6/4.7 mid-Match."
56403 - ice-on-valid "The fix seems extremely safe, so I think backporting to 4.6 and 4.7 makes sense."
56470 - ice-on-valid "Fixed on trunk. Testing back-port to 4.7."
56608 - wrong-code - fixed on trunk 2013-03-13
56539 - wrong-code/ice-on-valid - fixed on trunk 2013-03-06 "The patch fixes the problem for both 4.7 and 4.8"
56270 - ice-on-valid - fixed on trunk 2013-03-05
56175 - missed-optimization - fixed on trunk 2013-02-25
new potential backports:
52448 - wrong-code - fixed on trunk 2013-02-08
48133 - ice-on-valid - fixed on trunk, but not clear where
45472 - ice (on-valid?) - fixed on trunk 2013-02-27
Hope this is useful.
thanks,
-Kenny
</pre>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>