This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PING] Contributing new gcc targets: i386-*-dragonfly and x86-64-*-dragonfly
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: John Marino <gnugcc at marino dot st>
- Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "libstdc++" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 13:23:50 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PING] Contributing new gcc targets: i386-*-dragonfly and x86-64-*-dragonfly
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5352D100 dot 9040108 at marino dot st> <CAH6eHdS7JsVKz=c1T_b1B6uSixCnZsqhurOPUivEm=-w3T_j3Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <53541A34 dot 7050908 at marino dot st> <535FC71E dot 8070406 at marino dot st>
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:37 AM, John Marino <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Does anyone have any issues with this set of patches to add support for
> the DragonFly targets? It's a blocker for other patches of mine that
> have a more general benefit, but this (relatively simple) one has to go
> in first.
It's inconvenient, but patches are much more likely to be reviewed
when they cover a separate part of the tree, as different people
maintain different parts. I expect your libitm and libcilkrts could
be approved trivially if you send them separately.
The change to include/libiberty.h is fine.
I don't understand the benefit of libgcc/enable-execute-stack-bsd.c.
The code seems the same as the existing
libgcc/enable-execute-stack-mprotect.c. All you are changing is
omitting need_enable_exec_stack. If you just drop the FreeBSD
constructor, you will get the behaviour you want.