release_35 patches for unroll pragma

[Mark Heffernan]

And here are the patches...

Mark



On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Mark Heffernan <meheff at google.com> wrote:

> Sorry, forgot about this :-(  Here's the patched to release_35 which
> removes reference to unroll-related pragmas and the respective metadata as
> discussed earlier in the thread.  These are doc-only (*.rst) patches.  OK?
>
> Bill, can these be merged to the release branch?  Background: 3.5 was cut
> in the middle of a number of changes to support the unroll pragma.  Since
> the cut, the metadata and unroll pragma syntax have changed and a couple of
> small bug fixes went in.  These doc patches remove any reference to the
> unroll pragma and metadata so we don't have to carry forward support for
> the older syntax.  Also, this avoid publicizing the unroll pragmas which at
> the time of the cut had a couple of unpatched bugs.
>
> Thanks!
> Mark
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote:
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Mark Heffernan" <meheff at google.com>
>> > To: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>
>> > Cc: "Eric Christopher" <echristo at gmail.com>, "cfe-commits" <
>> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>, llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu,
>> > "Aaron Ballman" <aaron.ballman at gmail.com>
>> > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 6:22:16 PM
>> > Subject: Re: release_35 patches for unroll pragma
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Hal Finkel < hfinkel at anl.gov >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, I was on vacation that week, and I'm still playing
>> > catch-up on my e-mail...
>> >
>> > At this point I think it is too late to pull in these kinds of
>> > changes, but, if we didn't previously, we should add auto-upgrade
>> > support for the renamed metadata.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Recently got back from vacation myself... Earlier in the thread there
>> > was the suggestion of removing mention of the unroll pragma and
>> > metadata from the 3.5 docs because support for it is incomplete. I
>> > agree and I'll send out a patch for this. Would it still be
>> > necessary to add the auto-upgrade support since the unroll pragma
>> > and associated metadata would not be officially supported?
>>
>> If it is not documented nor officially supported, probably not.
>>
>>  -Hal
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Mark
>> >
>> >
>> > -Hal
>> >
>> > >
>> > > -eric
>> > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hal Finkel
>> > Assistant Computational Scientist
>> > Leadership Computing Facility
>> > Argonne National Laboratory
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Hal Finkel
>> Assistant Computational Scientist
>> Leadership Computing Facility
>> Argonne National Laboratory
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140902/18314b7b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: llvm.doc.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3036 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140902/18314b7b/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: clang.doc.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 3865 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140902/18314b7b/attachment-0001.bin>