Jeff Law <jeffreya...@gmail.com> writes: > On 4/2/23 14:06, Andrew Pinski wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 12:55 PM Jeff Law via Gcc-patches >> <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/31/23 12:44, Sam James wrote: >>>> >>>> Kito Cheng <kito.ch...@gmail.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> It's not the RISC-V part, so this requires a global maintainer there I >>>>> think? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Someone able to look at the system.h bit? It should be trivial, there's >>>> no uses left and it was added purely for a bug like this in the past >>>> (see commit message). >>> You assert that pthread.h is no longer used... But ISTM you really need >>> to go back to when the include was added, understand why it was added >>> and explain why it is no longer needed. >> It was needed for the JIT front-end at the time used pthread_mutex_* >> and pthread.h could use a poisoned identifier (I think it was calloc); >> the INCLUDE_PTHREAD_H was added with r13-1350-g49d508065bdd36. The JIT >> front-end moved to using C++11's mutex in r13-4164-g0a62889c7a155f and >> moved away from using pthread.h but didn't remove INCLUDE_PTHREAD_H >> support. >> I hope that help explains why it is no longer needed and how it >> became >> even unused. > SO I'm confused, what does this have to do with RISC-V?
Thanks Andrew for explaining. I took some of it as obvious given the context in the series but I should've explained this more in the commit message. It's related to RISC-V in that I sent it at the same time while fixing a musl poisoning issue in RISC-V, then cleaned up something while working on it, and the thing I cleaned up was added for a similar issue to the thing I fixed in RISC-V. I don't mind if we defer it to GCC 14, but it seems overkill given it's trivial and the include was only added in the course of GCC 13's development. But happy to resend with an improved commit message either way. thanks, sam
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
