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 1/2] BZ#13743: PowerPC - Add a new header for platformspecific functions


On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 11:59 -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Steven Munroe
> <munroesj@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> What stops GCC from installing a header?
> >>
> > Well I would have to ask. But the facts are that the existing headers
> > ppc_asm.h and ppu_intrinsics.h seem to be primarily intended for
> > internal gcc use, are not published in /usr/include, and are not
> > documented.
> 
> Could you please ask? It would help to clarify GCC's position on this.
> 
Bringing David and Michael into the conversation.

> > We need these to APIs to be easy to find, documented, and durable (a
> > commitment to be there in the next release).
> 
> Do you feel then that the GCC community is unable to make this commitment?
> 
Well as a Toolchain Architect I can see a separation between language
issues and APIs where GCC is focused on language and GLIBC is focused on
APIs. And I would put the timebase and program priority register into
the API category.

So the GCC community can and does make such commitments (for example the
__sync_fetch_and_* builtins) that can be implemented cross platform. But
I can see where they might decide that this specific case is not a good
example for GCC to carry.

But I should let David and Michael speak for themselves.

> The GLIBC community could certainly make such a commitment, but final
> responsibility rests with you and Ryan as the official power maintainers.



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