> -----Original Message----- > From: pins...@gmail.com [mailto:pins...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Andrew > Pinski > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 2:58 PM > To: Terry Guo > Cc: Richard Guenther; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; tob...@grosser.es; > seb...@gmail.com; Michael Matz; Diego Novillo; Joey Ye > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move Graphite from using PPL over to ISL > > On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 11:51 PM, Terry Guo <terry....@arm.com> wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > > > What's the plan for 4.7 branch? Will you back port this patch to 4.7 > and > > make it use ISL too? I am going to create a upstream GCC SVN branch > from 4.7 > > for development on ARM embedded processors. If there will be some big > > changes for 4.7 in near future in terms of replacing PPL with ISL, I > will > > delay the creation of my branch. Thanks. > > GCC has a policy of not backporting new features to release branches. > This can be considered a new feature. In fact what might happen is > disabling of the graphite support on the 4.7 branch instead. > > Is there a reason why you can't do development on the trunk? And then > support a 4.7 for your own uses? At Cavium, we try to do development > on an internal tree and then post them upstream. Though in the future > we would like to do things upstream first and then backport features > to a release branch that we handle internally. >
Hi Tobi and Andrew, Thanks for your timely answers. I just saw Sebastian's comments: Yes, having GCC only depend on ISL and CLooG-ISL (and not depend anymore on PPL) is our plan for 4.7. from http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-08/msg01161.html. As for development model, we do work as Andrew said, upstream first and then backport features. The 4.7 branch I mentioned is mainly because we want to make a tool chain release based on 4.7 with some fixes backported from trunk. BR, Terry
