From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
To: brobecker@adacore.com (Joel Brobecker)
Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: GDB 7.0 regressions: s390(x)-linux, ppc(64)-linux, spu-elf
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:32:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200909281632.n8SGW1YR004895@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090928153818.GE9019@adacore.com> from "Joel Brobecker" at Sep 28, 2009 08:38:18 AM
Joel Brobecker wrote:
> The target date for release is Wed, so we're about 48 hours away.
> If you feel confident about your fix, then you should go ahead and
> commit to the branch. According to the guidelines I remember reading
> somewhere (it might be in the MAINTAINERS file), if the change only
> affects one target, we can also discuss putting that change in. For
> the rest of your patches, we need to look at them individually and
> evaluate the risk. Based on that, we can decide whether delaying
> the release is necessary, and whether each patch should be applied
> to the branch and if yes, whether it should be applied now (for 7.0),
> or only after it has had a chance to be tested a little more on the
> HEAD.
Well, my feeling would be:
- Put in the patches that are testsuite-only (7, 8, 9 in my list)
They should be harmless and significantly clean up test suite
results on some platforms
- Put in the solely platform-specific patches (3, 5, 6)
I've tested these, and they definitely help on those platforms
- The bitfield regression (1) seems a serious error affecting
multiple platforms that really should be fixed, and the patch
seems straightforward ...
(All the above patches are already in mainline.)
The remaining two PowerPC-related patches (not yet in mainline)
are more difficult:
- The displaced stepping regression is unfortunate, as it completely
breaks a new feature. The patch *should* affect only PowerPC, but
it does need to touch generic files (infrun.c), so there's always
some risk. In any case, I'd prefer to get at least some feedback
before putting it in ...
- The Obj-C changes are not really a regression, so it may not really
be critical to put those in. On the other hand, they just touch
Obj-C code (except for one PowerPC-specific bugfix), and they
drastically improve the situation on PowerPC-64, so it would be
nice ... Again, I'd definitely like some feedback first.
Thanks,
Ulrich
--
Dr. Ulrich Weigand
GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE
Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-28 16:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-27 21:55 Ulrich Weigand
2009-09-28 15:38 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-09-28 16:32 ` Ulrich Weigand [this message]
2009-09-28 18:23 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-09-29 1:05 ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-09-29 1:39 ` Joel Brobecker
2009-09-29 12:55 ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-09-28 16:41 ` Tom Tromey
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200909281632.n8SGW1YR004895@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com \
--to=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=gdb@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox