Since this is a large feature branch review is a bit harder in this case.
99493 - OK
99494 - OK
99495 - OK - has gone upstream .
99496 - OK - could go upstream into FSF 4.5 branch if possible.
99497 - OK
99498 - OK
99499 - OK
OK if no regressions.
99500 - OK - Looks sensible but would like to do a round of benchmarking but can go in for sure.
99501 - Not fully reviewed. A first cut review - I *think* this is a sensible approach given that we can't just blanket remove SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS .Should we take this at the start of the next release, so that it gets baked for 3 weeks more than just a week before the release ?
99502 - Ambivalent - Not fully reviewed . A comment is we probably want some testcases for this and it looks overall like a nice improvement.Should we take this at the start of the next release, so that it gets baked for 3 weeks more than just a week before the release ?
Since this is a large feature branch review is a bit harder in this case.
99493 - OK
99494 - OK
99495 - OK - has gone upstream .
99496 - OK - could go upstream into FSF 4.5 branch if possible.
99497 - OK
99498 - OK
99499 - OK
OK if no regressions.
99500 - OK - Looks sensible but would like to do a round of benchmarking but can go in for sure.
99501 - Not fully reviewed. A first cut review - I *think* this is a sensible approach given that we can't just blanket remove SLOW_UNALIGNED_ ACCESS .Should we take this at the start of the next release, so that it gets baked for 3 weeks more than just a week before the release ?
99502 - Ambivalent - Not fully reviewed . A comment is we probably want some testcases for this and it looks overall like a nice improvement.Should we take this at the start of the next release, so that it gets baked for 3 weeks more than just a week before the release ?
cheers
Ramana