reames added a comment. In D149314#4302300 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D149314#4302300>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In D149314#4302266 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D149314#4302266>, @asb wrote: > >> In D149314#4302203 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D149314#4302203>, >> @aaron.ballman wrote: >> >>> Is this a potentially breaking change that we need to call out for users to >>> be aware of? >> >> We should mention this in the Clang release notes I think. > > Beyond that, we've got a process for what to do when considering potentially > breaking changes, we should be following that: > https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#making-potentially-breaking-changes > Also, if we're all agreed this is potentially breaking, it really should > have more review time and buy-in from the code owner. I don't think this change should count as "potentially breaking" in the sense of that document. We're talking about an experimental feature for an experimental ISA extension which never got to ratification. There's no hardware in the wild which implements this (to my knowledge). Given the churn on the RISCV extension side, we've adopted a policy for experimental extensions (https://llvm.org/docs/RISCVUsage.html#experimental-extensions) which offers much less in the way of support. I think we should release note it just to be friendly, but the process described in your link is significant overkill. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D149314/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D149314 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
