On Oct 14, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkac...@arm.com> wrote: > On 14/10/13 11:23, Paulo Matos wrote: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-patches-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] >>> On >>> Behalf Of Paulo Matos >>> Sent: 14 October 2013 11:22 >>> To: Kyrill Tkachov >>> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org >>> Subject: RE: [PATCH] Fix PR58682 >>> >>> >>> OK, testcase generated. Patch attached but there are a few issues and need >>> some comments. >>> >> I am sorry, I forgot to attach the patch. Here it is. >> OK, testcase generated. Patch attached but there are a few issues and need >> some comments. > >> * The test includes 6 additional sources and 3 headers. This feels like it >> pollutes the test >> directory a lot. Should I at least submit preprocessed sources, so that the >> headers disappear? >> * The sources come from CoreMark, does anybody know if their license allows >> us to include this >> test in GCC? Also, the code if formatted with CoreMark formatting, should I >> just use indent to >> properly format the patch? > I'd think there would be legal issues adding coremark to the testsuite but > I'm not an expert on this. In any case, I think it's too big of a testcase. > Any way we could reduce it?
In general, you can only submit software you personally wrote to gcc if you have papers on file with the FSF for contributions. If someone else wrote it, you have to have them submit it. Start there, and you can learn all the details an exceptions after that. The test suite is slightly more lax, in that we don't require an assignment for contributions, but, copyrightable works still need approval from the owner of the works, if the works don't already come with distribution and modification clauses that would allow the contribution to be added to the test suite. If in doubt, first, post the license and let's talk about it, before posting any code. In this case, I've reviewed the license I suspect you have, and I suspect it does not have a grant of enough rights to allow it to be contributed to gcc. >> * Last, but not least, this patch only causes an ICE on 4_8, but not >> because trunk is fixed. >> Instead trunk generates edge counts in such a way that they never happen to >> be higher than max_count >> when a call is inlined. Is it still worth it to get it into trunk (even >> though trunk should >> still be patched?) > CC'ing one of the testsuite maintainers… I'll punt this, as I think we're out into the weeds already.
