On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: > "H.J. Lu" <hjl.to...@gmail.com> writes: > >>> I don't think removing this code is desirable. As discussed, there >>> needs to be one of the libsanitizer maintainers who takes care of >>> porting changes from the GCC side to upstream and importing upstream, as >>> Ian does for libgo. >> >> I think all changes should go upstream first. It was a mistake >> to check sparc changes into GCC tree. > > I disagree, as do others: it is undesirable for gcc maintainers to have > to interact with many different upstream communities to get their > changes in. This is far better dealt with by the respective > subsystem/library maintainers who have links to both communities.
This may work for a mature library. libsanitizer keeps changes. Local changes make it hard to sync with upstream. > Btw., currently there's no libsanitizer maintainer listed in > MAINTAINERS. This needs to change. > That is the real problem. We need a GCC libsanitizer maintainer: 1. He/she must have checkin privilege for upstream. 2. He/she should keep libsanitizer up to date. 3. All GCC libsanitizer changes shared with upstream must be approved by him/her. -- H.J.
