lebedev.ri added a comment. Were you able to actually reproduce the problem that lead to revert of D107799 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D107799>, or is this based on blind guesses?
In D110663#3149364 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D110663#3149364>, @MaskRay wrote: > In D110663#3148690 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D110663#3148690>, > @sylvestre.ledru wrote: > >> I am not sure why you are pinging this review often?! Maybe chat with people >> who gave you feedback before directly?! > > https://llvm.org/docs/CodeReview.html "If it is not urgent, the common > courtesy ping rate is one week." I did it less frequently than once per week. > > Ping @phosek > >> Myself I wasted so much time because of D107799 >> <https://reviews.llvm.org/D107799> that I am very reluctant to enable >> LLVM_ENABLE_PER_TARGET_RUNTIME_DIR again. >> The mismatch of the triple / quadruple between the system triple and what >> have been decided in llvm ( x86_64-linux-gnu vs x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) >> >>> Moreover, llvm-project has always had the attitude: "downstream projects >>> are on their own". >> >> I am not sure it is a correct statement. llvm project is a bunch of people >> with different focus. >> But in general, we are trying to be nice with the ecosystem and people who >> rely on this software. > > Still correct. For courtesy I typically notify projects but many changes > (especially IR and codegen changes) cannot really notify users simply because > you cannot enumerate every user and > in some IR/codegen folks's minds this would unnecessarily slow down > development. > For this case I have notified rust, which may be the most likely impacted > user. I think the mostly likely impacted user was probably just Fuchsia, but > I have added a hack to exclude Fuchsia. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D110663/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D110663 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
