This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH v2 0/10] Tilera (and Linux asm-generic) support for glibc


On Sat, 3 Dec 2011, Chris Metcalf wrote:

> On 11/11/2011 4:42 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> >> * elf/elf.h: This change adds the relevant Tilera ELF constants.
> > elf.h always remains unified.  If your constants and names are standardized
> > to the extent that binutils trunk is using them, then we will harmonize.
> 
> Here's the final version, which matches what is in binutils.  It has
> changed slightly since the previous submission, since the tile gcc
> maintainer and I worked out a somewhat better (forward-looking) model
> for TLS support.  (In particular, we now support IE directly, and are
> prepared to do the work to support LE transparently when we get the
> time to spend on it.)
> 
> 2011-12-03  Chris Metcalf  <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
> 
> 	* elf/elf.h: Include Tilera machine types and relocation values.

I don't see anything wrong with this.  To my mind, we should consider 
target-specific parts of elf.h to be covered by target maintainership 
(whether the target is in libc or in ports), and likewise for 
target-specific parts of other files.  That's the rule followed in GCC: 
target maintainership is for the logical target, not for a physical set of 
files.  That is, I think we should say the maintainership rules allow you 
to commit this to libc, allow me to commit changes to the ARM definitions 
in elf.h, and so on.

On another note, I was trying to find another one of your pending Tile 
libc patches lately and found it quite hard because of the subject lines 
of the messages.  Could you repost the pending patches, with meaningful 
subject lines describing what the patch in question actually does, so they 
can be found without knowing the n/10 number?  (It was the fenv.h patch 
<http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2011-11/msg00023.html> - did you end 
up resolving that issue some other way?)

(Once the patches are in, I expect it will make sense to get them on 2.15 
branch as well.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]