On Wed, 13 May 2026, Christopher Bazley wrote: > On 24/03/2026 14:27, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > >> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 11:52:41 +0000 > >> From: Christopher Bazley <[email protected]> > > > >> On 23/03/2026 16:14, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > >>>> From: Christopher Bazley <[email protected]> > >>>> Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2026 15:33:07 +0000 > >>> > >>> The following patch, archived as > >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2026-February/708111.html > >>> seems to have received no comments nor has it been pinged > >>> AFAICT. > >>> > >>> I'd like to ping it on behalf of the author, and FWIW > >>> endorse it. If the author has lost interest (I hope not), I > >>> offer to adopt it. > >> > >> Hi Hans-Peter, > >> > >> Thank you for your support. I have not lost interest. > > > > Good! > > > >> Andrew Pinski was the most recent global reviewer. He okayed a version > >> of this patch at the end of January. See > >> https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/[email protected]/ > > > > Ah, that explains why I saw no traffic on the subject > > searching from Feb 10th onwards! :-) > > > >> Andrew asked Richard whether my patch needs to wait for GCC 17 stage 1. > >> Richard's reply (on February 12th, on IRC) was "my general answer would > >> be it's too late now". > > > > I must say I totally agree with your comment there: it fits > > gcc-16 nicely (and even the gcc-15 series), considering it's > > warning about behavior introduced in gcc-15. That's also > > why I never thought this was delayed. > > > > May I ask that the release maintainer to reconsider? > > > > brgds, H-P > > Hello Hans-Peter, > > I'm pleased to report that my patch to add > -Wzero-init-padding-bits=(standard|unions|all) was merged to GCC trunk > yesterday as > 2502a459db595905f6406b7994a27729c1e99a1d. > > I'll leave it up to the maintainers to decide whether it should now be > backported to those releases that contain 0547dbb725b (namely, releases/gcc-15 > and releases/gcc-16). > > I'm not sure of the policy on backporting patches that are not bugfixes.
They are not suitable for branches. Richard.
