Dnia poniedziałek, 20 grudnia 2010 o 20:03:03 Mark Mitchell napisał(a):
I'm not trying to take an extreme position; I'm really looking for an answer here. We've got something approaching 100 engineers doing ARM-oriented work in various components. They build on ARM, test on ARM, benchmark on ARM. They live ARM, they breathe ARM. I think it's likely they're going to break non-ARM, no matter how well-intentioned they are.
s/ARM/ARMv7 in whole paragraph maybe?
So, the question is what policies we should have pre-checkin (to validate other architectures) and post-checkin (when a problem is reported on another architecture). I don't think we have very good clarity there.
I suspect that if more distributions start taking more technology from Linaro, we'll see this issue arise more and more often.
OpenEmbedded already uses lot of Linaro patches in their gcc 4.5 recipe. They already found issues in armv4t code generation and reported it to us. Chung- Lin Tang fixed it. Now someone with MIPS complains...
Each time other distribution (or build system) will take our changes and reports us back with failure information we should take care. Remember that all our changes will once land in upstream - we should not break GCC twice.
Regards,