Re: New Port for RISC-V v3

On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 00:43:09 PST (-0800), ebotca...@adacore.com wrote: >> I believe we're in. Thanks for the help! > > Congratulations. There are a few post-integration items to be done: > > "If the back end is added to the official GCC source repository, the > following are also necessary: > >

Re: New Port for RISC-V v3

> I believe we're in. Thanks for the help! Congratulations. There are a few post-integration items to be done: "If the back end is added to the official GCC source repository, the following are also necessary: * An entry for the target architecture in `readings.html' on the GCC web sit

Re: New Port for RISC-V v3

On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 11:19:56 PST (-0800), ja...@redhat.com wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 11:18:12AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> OK, great! I think we're all set: >> >> * Here's the responses to the documentation comments >>, >>

Re: New Port for RISC-V v3

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 11:18:12AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > OK, great! I think we're all set: > > * Here's the responses to the documentation comments >, >. > > * I

Re: New Port for RISC-V v3

On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:21:36 PST (-0800), ja...@redhat.com wrote: > On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 10:38:18AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> There have been a handful of changes since we submitted our v2 port: >> >> * Some documentation formatting fixes. >> >> * A documentation typo fix. >> >> * Some

Re: New Port for RISC-V v3

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 10:38:18AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > There have been a handful of changes since we submitted our v2 port: > > * Some documentation formatting fixes. > > * A documentation typo fix. > > * Some changes to wwwdocs, which have been mailed to the list. > > * The port

Re: New Port for RISC-V v2

On 02/02/2017 01:05 AM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: Thanks to everyone who reviewed our original patch set. I've tried to CC everyone who provided a review, sorry if I missed anyone! Andrew, Kito and I believe that we've addressed almost all of the feedback from the reviews of our v1 patch set. Sinc

New Port for RISC-V v3

There have been a handful of changes since we submitted our v2 port: * Some documentation formatting fixes. * A documentation typo fix. * Some changes to wwwdocs, which have been mailed to the list. * The port now builds via contrib/config-list.mk. I worked around the warnings in other

Re: New Port for RISC-V v2

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > How do these look? Fine for readings.html. backends.html, not my cup of tea. ;-) Gerald

Re: New Port for RISC-V v2

On Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:08:06 PST (-0800), Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:58:32 PST (-0800), jos...@codesourcery.com wrote: >> On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> >>> Additionally, here's a diff against wwwdocs. This is really just to check >>> this >>> is all I'm supposed

Re: New Port for RISC-V v2

On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > OK, thanks. As far as I know, I don't have write access to anything > yet. Should I request it from overse...@sourceware.org? I already have > binutils git access. Yes, and you can name me as your sponsor. Gerald

Re: New Port for RISC-V v2

On Thu, 02 Feb 2017 13:07:25 PST (-0800), ger...@pfeifer.com wrote: > Hi Palmer, > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> Additionally, here's a diff against wwwdocs. This is really just to >> check this is all I'm supposed to do, I can submit a proper patch via >> the mailing list (I just

Re: New Port for RISC-V v2

On Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:58:32 PST (-0800), jos...@codesourcery.com wrote: > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > >> Additionally, here's a diff against wwwdocs. This is really just to check >> this >> is all I'm supposed to do, I can submit a proper patch via the mailing list >> (I >> just

Re: New Port for RISC-V v2

Hi Palmer, On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > Additionally, here's a diff against wwwdocs. This is really just to > check this is all I'm supposed to do, I can submit a proper patch via > the mailing list (I just don't know how to use CVS, sorry). > > Index: htdocs/gcc-7/changes.htm

Re: New Port for RISC-V v2

On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > Additionally, here's a diff against wwwdocs. This is really just to check > this > is all I'm supposed to do, I can submit a proper patch via the mailing list (I > just don't know how to use CVS, sorry). Other parts of the wwwdocs changes (backends.ht

New Port for RISC-V v2

Thanks to everyone who reviewed our original patch set. I've tried to CC everyone who provided a review, sorry if I missed anyone! Andrew, Kito and I believe that we've addressed almost all of the feedback from the reviews of our v1 patch set. Since it's been a while we wanted to get a v2 patch

Re: New Port for RISC-V

Thank you for taking the time to give us feedback. On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > General observation: I see no documentation (no changes to .texi files) > anywhere in this patch series. I also don't see updates to config-list.mk > to add RISC-V targets to the set that bu

Re: New Port for RISC-V

General observation: I see no documentation (no changes to .texi files) anywhere in this patch series. I also don't see updates to config-list.mk to add RISC-V targets to the set that builds. (You should make sure the port builds cleanly when built with current mainline GCC and configured wit

New Port for RISC-V

We'd like to submit for inclusion in GCC a port for the RISC-V architecture. The port suffices to build a substantial body of software (including Linux and some 2,000 Fedora packages) and passes most of the gcc and g++ test suites; so, while it is doubtlessly not complete, we think it is far enough