Syncing platform-specific bits with generic code (was: Mark inputs being ZERO as unlikely __mul in powerpc)

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 02/20/2013 11:50 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On 20 February 2013 21:59, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
>> If you want you can kick-off a question regarding concensus:
>> "If performance is not degraded, can patches that synchronize
>>  machine copies of code with generic copies of code be committed
>>  without review?"
> 
> That would definitely be more convenient.  In fact, I was wondering if
> we could follow the gdb-style definition of Obvious Changes:
> 
> "All maintainers listed in this file, including the Write After Approval
> developers, are allowed to check in obvious fixes.

I'm confused. Our MAINTAINER's page already says that?

"Write after Consensus and/or approval from machine maintainer..."

Where Consensus is a link to the Consensus page.

> The above text seems to cover most of the bits we already have in the
> Consensus wiki page.  In addition, things like fixing trivial build
> warnings also get included.

If something is missing form the Consensus page then we need to gather
consensus and add it?

Cheers,
Carlos.