mstorsjo wrote: > > For the Mips backend itself, I would ask the Mips backend code > > maintainer... but we don't have a maintainer for Mips. And we don't have > > any buildbots. I'm really not sure about adding complexity to a backend > > which is already suffering from a lack of anyone that has any experience > > with it. (People familiar with other backends can sort of step in to review > > changes to Mips, but it's hard to do a good review for anything > > non-trivial.) > > FWIW, I've seen @wzssyqa do some amount of work around MIPS, should we ask > them about whether want to take up the role as MIPS backend maintainer?
Ping @wzssyqa - what's your take on this, both about the maintainance state of the MIPS target overall, and if you have concerns around accepting patches in this area? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/107744 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
