On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 03:51:27PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:50:02PM +0100, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:50:02PM +0100, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
o
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:50:02PM +0100, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >
> >As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
> >against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
> >only mode.
Dorit Nuzman/Haifa/IBM wrote on 23/01/2008 21:49:51:
> There are however a couple of small cost-model changes that were
> going to be submitted this week for the Cell SPU - it's unfortunate
> if these cannot get into 4.3.
It's indeed unfortunate. However, those changes are not crucial and there
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Richard,
>Just to clarify, does this mean that any architecture
> which doesn't have a fully optimized cost-model currently
> in gcc trunk will have to wait for gcc 4.4? I ask because
> the cost-model bugs wouldn't actually be a regressions
> from gcc
> Richard,
>Will gcc 4.3.0's release be held up until all of the major
> architectures have fully optimized cost models for vectorization?
> I ask because as far as I can tell the powerpc cost model changes
> haven't been submitted yet.
At this point it doesn't look like there will be any cost
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
>against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
>only mode. This means that for patches going on the trunk the same
>rules as for relea
Richard,
Just to clarify, does this mean that any architecture
which doesn't have a fully optimized cost-model currently
in gcc trunk will have to wait for gcc 4.4? I ask because
the cost-model bugs wouldn't actually be a regressions
from gcc 4.2. I mainly wanted to make sure that we didn't
have
On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 12:06 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
> against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
> only mode. This means that for patches going on the trunk the same
> rules as for release br
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Richard,
>Will gcc 4.3.0's release be held up until all of the major
> architectures have fully optimized cost models for vectorization?
> I ask because as far as I can tell the powerpc cost model changes
> haven't been submitted yet. It certainly wou
Richard,
Will gcc 4.3.0's release be held up until all of the major
architectures have fully optimized cost models for vectorization?
I ask because as far as I can tell the powerpc cost model changes
haven't been submitted yet. It certainly would be nice if all
of the major targets could have -f
Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
> against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
> only mode. This means that for patches going on the trunk the same
> rules as for release branches apply.
12 matches
Mail list logo
