Re: Four jit backports to gcc 5 branch

[Dibyendu Majumdar]

On 29 June 2015 at 16:44, David Malcolm  wrote:
> I've gone over the changes to the gcc/jit and gcc/testsuite/jit.dg
> directories in trunk since gcc 5 and backported the following 4 changes
> from trunk to the gcc-5-branch:
>
> gcc-5-branch's r225123:
>   * trunk's r222863 (8120405bda9bf28b004e09b23e74eda57ae1, addition
> of test-benchmark.c):
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-05/msg00500.html
>
>
> gcc-5-branch's r225125:
>   * trunk's r224531 (8154a3514d5fc8067a6928531d5f61cd768bd62c
> along with trunk's r224535 (1828cd755cf5e4a34d5638f543a059f3562ad957,
> "PR jit/66539: Add parentheses as needed to
> gcc_jit_object_get_debug_string"):
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01158.html
>
>
> gcc-5-branch's r225127:
>   * trunk's r224536 (3052eeefc4607a7147fdc55af6d86845890eb281, "jit: Add
> a test for compound assignment"):
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01164.html
>
>
> gcc-5-branch's r225129:
>   * trunk's r224565 (6689f47f53079d76bbb051d3b5da9018c2e0161a,
> "jit: Add missing type-checking to gcc_jit_{l|r}value_access_field")
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01211.html
>
>

Hi Dave - is this what will go into 5.2? If so, is the option to
disable "unreachable" block validation going to be available?

Thanks and Regards
Dibyendu

Re: Thinking about libgccjit SONAME bump for gcc 5.2 (was Re: Four jit backports to gcc 5 branch)

[Dibyendu Majumdar]

On 29 June 2015 at 22:26, David Malcolm  wrote:

>
> I'm working on that, I know that it's important to Ravi (the deadline
> for gcc-5.2 is Friday; 2015-07-03).

Thanks!

>
> There's no good way to track enums in binary metadata, so I'm currently
> thinking of this approach for the new options:
>
>  extern void
>  gcc_jit_context_set_bool_allow_unreachable_blocks (gcc_jit_context *ctxt,
> int bool_value);
>
> tagging it within the linker mapfile as being a new API.
>
>
> I'm looking at ways to manage libgccjit API/ABI as per this thread:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-06/msg01982.html
> by transitioning to using symbol versioning, so that the linker can tag
> subsets of libgccjit symbols in both libgccjit and in client binaries.
>
> Adding symbol versioning will involve a SONAME bump (from libgccjit.so.0
> to libgccjit.so.1), thus requiring anyone using libgccjit to recompile
> for this one change (the transition to versioned symbols, that is);
> hopefully we never need to bump the SONAME again.
>
> Given that this is needed by Ravi I feel that this break is worth
> backporting to gcc 5.2 (I'd rather do this one-time ABI break for the
> benefit of specific users, than not do it out of concern for
> hypothetical ones).
>
> Hope this sounds sane.
>

If you are just adding some API then does it need to be versioned?
Apologies if I am misunderstanding the reason here.

A breaking change would be if you changed an existing API.

Regards
Dibyendu