[llvm-dev] Target Acceptance Policy

Hal Finkel via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Jul 26 17:18:59 PDT 2016

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Renato Golin" <renato.golin at linaro.org>
> To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>
> Cc: "Mehdi Amini" <mehdi.amini at apple.com>, "LLVM Dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 7:11:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Target Acceptance Policy
> On 27 Jul 2016 12:50 a.m., "Hal Finkel" < hfinkel at anl.gov > wrote:
> > Sure; have we accepted backends in the recent past which contained
> > code that did not meet our coding conventions?
> I'm no authority, but when people have a back end to contribute, they
> have already done some due diligence, and the conventions are
> usually mostly there.
> But because the target was implemented off tree, there was less peer
> review, and why we may accept some minor violations if they get
> fixed later. Usually things that clang format can't fix.

Like what? Minor things are generally things that are easy to ask to be changed in a code review.

> For more accurate information, you could look into the recent merges:
> bpf, system z, apple's ARM64, lanai. They all had different
> histories. Also arm's AArch64, which was mostly brewed inside tree,
> but a good part was copied from the arm back end (I even found the
> same bugs on both) ;)
> I personally see all those efforts as successful, each with their own
> quirks, maybe none of them perfect, but definitely better with them
> than without.

I agree.


> Maybe I'm being too optimistic?
> Cheers,
> Renato

Hal Finkel
Assistant Computational Scientist
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list