On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 09:36:18AM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > In fact, I would suggest that anyone with a pending patch from prior > to stage1 close that hasn't gotten feedback by midnight Tuesday ping > their patch. I'd like to have a sense of everything that is > outstanding sooner rather than later and wrap up any loose ends as > quickly as possible.
Ok, doing that now for my pending patches: Masked load/store vectorization: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01268.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01437.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg01550.html Elemental function support (updated version of the earlier patch): http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg03197.html AddressSanitizer use-after-return instrumentation: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg02070.html Use libbacktrace for libsanitizer's symbolization (will need tweaking, depending on next libsanitizer merge, whether the corresponding sanitizer_common changes are upstreamed or not, and perhaps to compile libbacktrace sources again with renamed function names and other tweaks - different allocator, only subset of files, etc.; but, there is a P1 bug for this anyway): http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg02055.html Jakub
