On 21/08/2025 18:45, Jeff Law wrote:


On 8/19/25 2:43 AM, Alfie Richards wrote:
Hi All,

Resending due to some email issues resulting in undelivered email.

Thank you so much for the reviews.
This revision is mostly addressing feedback from Richard S.

Changes since V8:
- Several stylistic changes/code clarity.
- Change check_target_clone_version to take a pointer to location_t rather than
   location_t and bool.
- Clarified the logic in redirect_to_specific_clone and added a check that
   the caller must have its default defined in the current TU for the
   FMV set calling FMV set part of the optimization to be valid.

The main outstanding changes to review are the C and C++ front end changes now.

Bootstrapped and reg tested on Aarch64 and x86.

Still hoping for GCC 16 for this, we're keen to get this synced with LLVM
before we start pushing it for users.
So what patches need a re-review?  Just want to make sure we focus in the right areas ;-)

Hi Jeff,

From my notes it's:

- *[02/13] fmv: Refactor FMV name mangling.*
Needs the C++, x86, and Risc-V changes reviewed. (Richard S approved the rest https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-August/692101.html)

- *[05/13] fmv: Change target_version semantics to follow ACLE specification.* Needs C/C++ changes reviewed (Richard S approved the rest https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-August/692217.html)

- *[06/13] c/c++: Add target_[version/clones] to decl diagnostics formatting.* Needs re-review due to the changes to C formatting, though I need to update C++ to address comments from Jason Merrill a couple of days ago (https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-August/692886.html)

- *[07/13] c++: Refactor FMV frontend conflict and merging logic and hooks.* Has not been approved yet to my knowledge, has outstanding comments to rename a couple functions from Jason that I have yet to address (https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2025-August/692891.html)

- *[PATCH v9 11/13] c: Add target_version attribute support.*
Has not been reviewed yet to my knowledge.

Thanks again for the reviews,

Alfie


jeff


Reply via email to