This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [RFC] Backport of workaround for cortex-a53 erratum 843419 to 2.24
- From: Maxim Kuvyrkov <maxim dot kuvyrkov at linaro dot org>
- To: Tristan Gingold <gingold at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>, Marcus Shawcroft <marcus dot shawcroft at arm dot com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 15:25:38 +0300
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Backport of workaround for cortex-a53 erratum 843419 to 2.24
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <552C4467 dot 4010800 at linaro dot org> <BF5E2894-266C-4F2B-9E0D-81BC4B4237EC at linaro dot org> <D67B8E15-4530-45E4-A36B-96F231A16036 at adacore dot com>
> On Apr 15, 2015, at 7:22 PM, Tristan Gingold <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On 15 Apr 2015, at 10:39, Maxim Kuvyrkov <email@example.com> wrote:
>> I am not very familiar with Binutils release branch policies either, but it seems that there have been no commits to either binutils-2_24 or binutils-2_25 branches since they were created.
> That's certainly not correct! Were you looking at a recent binutils-gdb.git pull ?
Indeed I was wrong. I can't explain what state my git clone was, but returned very different results from what I'm seeing now. Maybe I have just overworked a bit.
>> Would you please confirm whether or not it is possible to push bug fixes to those branches?
> Sure it is. Note that this is too late for 2.24: there won't be any new release on that branch, given 2.25 was created.
> For backporting to 2.25, it would be nice to have the OK from an ARM maintainer. Generally speaking, we only backport regression fixes or safe small improvements (not sure that 'Remove dead code' fit in these criteria).
OK, thanks for clearing this up.
Adhemerval, so the way forward seems to be to push 2.24 version to linaro_binutils-2_24-branch in git.linaro.org/toolchain/binutils-gdb.git repo, and push 2.25 version to upstream binutils-2_25-branch once it is approved by relevant maintainers.
>> [I think that the answer is "no", and rationale behind it is that various projects check binutils version to see if a particular feature is supported or bug is fixed. As there is no easy way to identify pre-bug-fix binutils-2_24 from post-bug-fix binutils-2_24, no one should depend on binutils-2_24 to have the bug fix.]
>> Hi Adhemerval,
>> Would you please push the above backport to a branch so that engineers at ARM and anyone else can review and/or test if they want to?
>> How did you test your backports? Are there any regressions from the patches? Does the whole toolchain (binutils, gcc, glibc, gdb) build work as expected?