Paul Irofti <[email protected]> wrote: > > A few more notes below. > > I addressed all the comments. Here is the updated diff. This includes > the rename to usertc that I suggested.
I want to see support for quite a few more architectures, especially those which are very different, because changing format of the shared page later will be very painful. > The libc bump is there because it helps me switch more easily between > versions. That is bogus. Minors are used for visible ABI additions, majors are used for ABI deletions or API changes visible as ABI. Please don't argue for a vague extension of the rules again. In essence this introduction requires no major or minor crank becuase it just starts selecting a different backend which is newly supplied. But as soon as the back-end is changed, the version number will barely help, since code which can't match it has to revert to the non-optimized path. I don't believe you can shortcut this by supporting 1 architecture and casting a prayer it's going to be fine.
