Hi! First, pardon the long CC list. You are, in my understanding, the people who are interested in collaborating on the topics that are being prepared on gomp-4_0-branch: "LTO" streaming, acceleration device offloading, OpenMP target, OpenACC, nvptx backend -- and more?
As we've noticed, and he has just recently told me, Jakub currently is totally occupied with getting the GCC 4.9 release in shape, and thus can't spend any reasonable amount of time on reviewing/developing patches for the gomp-4_0-branch topics. He suggested that I "take over" the branch, and he would chime in again, once his GCC 4.9 duties have calmed down. Now, my experience of GCC of course is nowhere close to Jakub's, and even though I'm learning a lot, it's not possible for me to provide patch reviews with the same quality as he does. On the other hand, I consider gomp-4_0-branch to be a development branch, so I'm fine with people committing stuff there that is not totally polished, as long as it doesn't cause havoc to the existing code (as made evident by compiler warnings during the GCC build as well as regressions in the testsuite). There can be occasional exceptions to this, for example if a patch causes a testsuite regression, but that regression is known and understood, and will be addressed in the following. (Please state such things in your patch submissions.) Also, I'm fine with getting work-in-progress stuff committed on the branch, with the same expectations of mentioning this in the submission, and completing the implementation later on. Let's first try to play this by email, but if it grows out of bound, perhaps a wiki page will help to track known-broken/incomplete stuff? As before, patches should be posted (with a [gomp4] tag) before committing them, and at least be given some review and acknowledgement. That is, consensus by the people interested in the topics worked on on this branch. Also, let's not be shy to ask GCC's area maintainers (top-level MAINTAINERS file) for help (CC them in your submissions), for example for front end changes. It should be in their own interest to do such review early ;-), as eventually all these changes aggregated on the branch are to be merged into trunk. Also, as far as possible, let's try to get individual changes into trunk early, instead of aggregating lots of stuff on gomp-4_0-branch, so that the diff between the two branches doesn't grow too big (which makes branch maintenence difficult, such as when doing merges from trunk). (I'm aware this is less relevant/possible until GCC 4.9 has branched.) Jakub suggested (and I agree) the first thing to be done on gomp-4_0-branch is a merge from trunk, which he hasn't done for a long time. I have prepared this yesterday morning, and have it ready for commit, but... ..., now Samsung have posted, <http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3C52E158EF.9050009%40samsung.com%3E>, patches for OpenACC support for Fortran, which likely will be conflicting with the trunk merge as well as it does partially conflict with my pending patch series for initial support for OpenACC data clauses, <http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=%3C87ppnuvbv6.fsf%40schwinge.name%3E>. Nevertheless, many thanks, Samsung people, for forward-porting this first set of changes from your openacc-1_0-branch to gomp-4_0-branch! We shall now work on integrating all this, and start reviewing the patches that have been posted. :-) Grüße, Thomas
Description: PGP signature