> Am 10.12.2025 um 14:40 schrieb Jakub Jelinek <[email protected]>:
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 02:28:39PM +0100, Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
>> I suppose that the target blocks cleanups means maintaining it out-of-tree
>> is not easily possible.
>>
>> IMO as there is interest in having the Itanium port in-tree and work is done
>> when required (like enabling LRA) I see no reason for deprecating or removing
>> the port. There are other unmaintained ports and frontends and IMO this
>> looks like a double-standard to me.
>>
>> I do agree that posting testresults from trunk semi-regularly is an important
>> sign of activity in addition to the bootstrap work folks are doing (but not
>> so much visible).
>
> Agreed.
> Though for selective scheduling, can't we either remove it anyway (will ia64
> work with normal scheduling? From what I can see selective scheduling
> is defaulted there only for -O3) or limit solely to ia64? Because it is just
> something completely unmaintained for years that just keeps being reported by
> fuzzers for x86/aarch64 all the time and never fixed.
I’d appreciate that as well. Same for SMS honestly, though that does nothing
for non-doloop targets.
Richard
>
> Jakub
>
