On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 21:05 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > I guess the most important question is what guarantees there are that it > won't affect non-powerpc* ports too much (my main concern is the 9/26 patch, > plus the C++ FE / libstdc++ changes), and how much does this affect > code generation and overall stability of the PowerPC big endian existing > targets. > > Jakub >
The three pieces that are somewhat controversial for non-powerpc targets are 9/26, 10/26, 15/26. * Uli and Alan, can you speak to any concerns for 9/26? * 10/26 hits libstdc++, but only in a minor way for the extract_symvers script; it adds a sed to ignore a string added for powerpc64le, so shouldn't be a problem. * 15/26 might be one we can do without. I need to check with Peter Bergner, who originally backported Fabien's patch, but unfortunately he is on vacation. That patch fixed a problem that originated on an x86 platform. I can try respinning the patch series without this one and see what breaks, or if Peter happens to see this while he's on vacation, perhaps he can comment. For PowerPC targets, I have already checked out powerpc64-linux (big endian). As David mentioned, I need to apply the patch series on an AIX machine and test it before this can be accepted. We don't have any way of testing the eabi stuff, so community help would be very much appreciated there. Thanks, Bill
