On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson
<hans-peter.nils...@axis.com> wrote:
>> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <h...@axis.com>
>> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:55:59 +0100
>
>> > From: Alan Modra <amo...@gmail.com>
>> > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 16:33:40 +0100
>>
>> > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 12:57:22AM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
>>
>> >         * function.c (bb_active_p): Delete.
>> >         (dup_block_and_redirect, active_insn_between): New functions.
>> >         (convert_jumps_to_returns, emit_return_for_exit): New functions,
>> >         split out from..
>> >         (thread_prologue_and_epilogue_insns): ..here.  Delete
>> >         shadowing variables.  Don't do prologue register clobber tests
>> >         when shrink wrapping already failed.  Delete all last_bb_active
>> >         code.  Instead compute tail block candidates for duplicating
>> >         exit path.  Remove these from antic set.  Duplicate tails when
>> >         reached from both blocks needing a prologue/epilogue and
>> >         blocks not needing such.
>> >         * ifcvt.c (dead_or_predicable): Test both flag_shrink_wrap and
>> >         HAVE_simple_return.
>> >         * bb-reorder.c (get_uncond_jump_length): Make global.
>> >         * bb-reorder.h (get_uncond_jump_length): Declare.
>> >         * cfgrtl.c (rtl_create_basic_block): Comment typo fix.
>> >         (rtl_split_edge): Likewise.  Warning fix.
>> >         (rtl_duplicate_bb): New function.
>> >         (rtl_cfg_hooks): Enable can_duplicate_block_p and duplicate_block.
>>
>> This (a revision in the range 181187:181189) broke build for
>> cris-elf like so:
>> See PR51051.
>
> Given that this also broke arm-linux-gnueabi, a primary
> platform, and Alan being absent until the 15th according to a
> message on IRC, I move to revert r181188.

Is there a PR for the arm issue?

> I think I need someone with appropriate write privileges to
> agree with that, and to also give 48h for someone to fix the
> problem.  Sorry for not forthcoming on the second point.

Did you or somebody else try to look into the problem?  To decide
whether it's the "best course of action" it would be nice to know if
it's a simple error in the patch that is easy to fix.

> brgds, H-P
> PS. where is the policy written down, besides the mailing list archives?

http://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html

Reply via email to