search for: code_owner

...PM, Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com> wrote: > Author: hhinnant > Date: Fri Feb 14 15:09:01 2014 > New Revision: 201432 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=201432&view=rev > Log: Remove myself as owner of libc++ > > Modified: > llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT > > Modified: llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT?rev=201432&r1=201431&r2=201432&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT...

Just brainstorming here, but what if each CODE_OWNER maintained a spork on Github and accepted Pull Requests? What's a spork, you ask? Well it's fork with no intent to diverge - it spoons some centralized repo (be it via git or git-svn). If you haven't heard the term 'spork' in this context before, it's either because I jus...

On 18 July 2015 at 00:51, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > The goal of CODE_OWNERS.txt is to give high level > guidance for who to ask questions of, seek out for code review, find for > partnering up for collaborating on crazy ideas, etc.. The right person for a > great deal of that on LLD+Darwin is Lang, and it would be a shame to have > the official listing not ref...

...Author: hhinnant >>> Date: Fri Feb 14 15:09:01 2014 >>> New Revision: 201432 >>> >>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=201432&view=rev >>> Log: Remove myself as owner of libc++ >>> >>> Modified: >>> llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT >>> >>> Modified: llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT >>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT?rev=201432&r1=201431&r2=201432&view=diff >>> ============================================================================== >&...

Please can we add a code owner entry for llvm-mca, which should probably be Andrea. I wasn't sure if we need to go through a full nomination process for new tools like this (and llvm-exegesis?) or we can just add the primary contributor to the CODE_OWNERS.TXT list immediately. Thanks, Simon.

..., 2015, at 9:01 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jul 19, 2015, at 6:04 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: >> >> On 18 July 2015 at 00:51, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: >>> The goal of CODE_OWNERS.txt is to give high level >>> guidance for who to ask questions of, seek out for code review, find for >>> partnering up for collaborating on crazy ideas, etc.. The right person for a >>> great deal of that on LLD+Darwin is Lang, and it would be a shame to have >>&...

...at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Please can we add a code owner entry for llvm-mca, which should probably be Andrea. > > I wasn't sure if we need to go through a full nomination process for new tools like this (and llvm-exegesis?) or we can just add the primary contributor to the CODE_OWNERS.TXT list immediately. > > Thanks, Simon. > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: > Just brainstorming here, but what if each CODE_OWNER maintained a spork on > Github and accepted Pull Requests? What's a spork, you ask? Well it's > fork with no intent to diverge - it spoons some centralized repo (be it via > git or git-svn). If you haven't heard the term 'spork' in this context > before, it's...

Hello all. At XMOS we are working towards updating the upstream XCore backend for newer versions of the chip. XCore is the XMOS processor. The XCore backend was written by Richard Osborne at XMOS. Richard has moved on. The current code owner in CODE_OWNERS.TXT, Robert Lytton, has also moved on. For some years XMOS has developed the compiler in-house, for new versions of the chip, but not upstreamed the changes. We are currently integrating the upstream changes into the shipping compiler, following the LLVM coding standards. We would like to upstrea...

...Behalf Of Eric Christopher Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 5:48 PM To: Greg Fitzgerald Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] code-owner sporks On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: Just brainstorming here, but what if each CODE_OWNER maintained a spork on Github and accepted Pull Requests? What's a spork, you ask? Well it's fork with no intent to diverge - it spoons some centralized repo (be it via git or git-svn). If you haven't heard the term 'spork' in this context before, it's either because I jus...

...job of updating the Hexagon backend and engaging in community discussions (on the Hexagon backend and on other topics). He has a number of improvements planned for the Hexagon compiler and is an obvious choice for owning the Hexagon target. If there are no objections, we’ll make the switch in CODE_OWNERS in the next few days. Thanks -Anshu -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20151202/e53bb08...

Hi Rui, > so I'd like to be an owner of the new linkers (both for ELF and COFF), ... Sounds good to me. Do you mind if I add myself as a code owner for LLD Core / MachO, since I'll be continuing to work on that? Cheers, Lang. On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 2:17 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 15 July 2015 at 00:08, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com>

Hello, Recent code owner activities have led to what I would call loss of referential integrity in the CODE_OWNERS.TXT file. Changes are fine but the information in the CODE_OWNERS.TXT does not allow to positively identify code owner of the particular file or patch. The problem stems from the usage of the "description (D)" field which is overloaded with meaning. Most people put only a textual des...

Hi Rogelio, Glad to see MBlaze will not be removed. I suggest you put your name on CODE_OWNERS.TXT. ;) Regards, chenwj -- Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任) Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science, Academia Sinica, Taiwan (R.O.C.) Tel:886-2-2788-3799 #1667 Homepage: http://people.cs.nctu.edu.tw/~chenwj

Who is a code owner for MSP430 target? I know that a lot of work on this target is done by Anton Korobeynikov (aka asl) but he is not listed as a code owner in CODE_OWNERS.TXT. I would like to get my D20162 reviewed, but I don't know who I can add as a reviewer.

...but directly apply the results of SCEV analysis. It should have the same owner. IndVars does also contain a sign-extend elimination algorithm, but that's primarily a legacy pass and I don't expect much work on it. Sounds great. Sanjoy, assuming this is ok with you, please add yourself to CODE_OWNERS.txt, congrats! -Chris

I’m nominating Matthias Braun as the Instruction Scheduling code owner (in place of myself). Matthias has made substantial contributions to the scheduler, particularly for subregister support, and has been reviewing patches in that area. I think target maintainers will be happy to have Matthias officially take over the role. -Andy

...on gets resolved. > I'd expect from release manager to understand the llvm/clang internal > organization and deduce the correct owner in most cases. Understanding the internal llvm/clang structure is easy, deducing the correct code owner is not due to the vague and changing nature of the CODE_OWNERS.TXT "Exception handling, Windows codegen, ARM EABI" > > -- > With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov > Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University > > Pawel

> Understanding the internal llvm/clang structure is easy, > deducing the correct code owner is not due to the > vague and changing nature of the CODE_OWNERS.TXT Does not seem to me and many people around. If in doubt - ask at ML or IRC. > "Exception handling, Windows codegen, ARM EABI" Just for your information - this covers some lines in some files in llvm/CodeGen, some files in lib/Target, some files in lib/Target/X86 and so on. Note t...

...sage "could you please include/add/merge this r16xxxx into 3.2?". And my immediate reaction is sure, no problem this fixes PR/issue/crash so it is important. But are you the code owner and do you approve? So I have to go and start checking because that is the process. In the past few days CODE_OWNERS.TXT on the trunk has been changing while 3.2 has been stable, I work on 3.2 branch so I have sent couple of e-mails to wrong people. Anyway, it was not my intention to cause message storm and this is taking way too much bandwidth on the list. As always, change is causing breakages until we all le...