On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 03:51:27PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:50:02PM +0100, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:50:02PM +0100, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
o
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:50:02PM +0100, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >
> >As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
> >against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
> >only mode.
Dorit Nuzman/Haifa/IBM wrote on 23/01/2008 21:49:51:
> There are however a couple of small cost-model changes that were
> going to be submitted this week for the Cell SPU - it's unfortunate
> if these cannot get into 4.3.
It's indeed unfortunate. However, those changes are not crucial and there
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Richard,
>Just to clarify, does this mean that any architecture
> which doesn't have a fully optimized cost-model currently
> in gcc trunk will have to wait for gcc 4.4? I ask because
> the cost-model bugs wouldn't actually be a regressions
> from gcc
> Richard,
>Will gcc 4.3.0's release be held up until all of the major
> architectures have fully optimized cost models for vectorization?
> I ask because as far as I can tell the powerpc cost model changes
> haven't been submitted yet.
At this point it doesn't look like there will be any cost
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 12:06:22PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>
>As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
>against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
>only mode. This means that for patches going on the trunk the same
>rules as for relea
Richard,
Just to clarify, does this mean that any architecture
which doesn't have a fully optimized cost-model currently
in gcc trunk will have to wait for gcc 4.4? I ask because
the cost-model bugs wouldn't actually be a regressions
from gcc 4.2. I mainly wanted to make sure that we didn't
have
On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 12:06 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
> against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
> only mode. This means that for patches going on the trunk the same
> rules as for release br
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Richard,
>Will gcc 4.3.0's release be held up until all of the major
> architectures have fully optimized cost models for vectorization?
> I ask because as far as I can tell the powerpc cost model changes
> haven't been submitted yet. It certainly wou
Richard,
Will gcc 4.3.0's release be held up until all of the major
architectures have fully optimized cost models for vectorization?
I ask because as far as I can tell the powerpc cost model changes
haven't been submitted yet. It certainly would be nice if all
of the major targets could have -f
Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
> against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
> only mode. This means that for patches going on the trunk the same
> rules as for release branches apply.
As we now reached the goal of less than 100 open serious regressions
against GCC 4.3, we are as of now in regression and documentation fixes
only mode. This means that for patches going on the trunk the same
rules as for release branches apply.
The next milestone before the release of GCC 4.3.0
13 matches
Mail list logo
