linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH V2] MIPS: BMIPS: fix compilation for BMIPS5000

To: John Crispin <john@phrozen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] MIPS: BMIPS: fix compilation for BMIPS5000
From: Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 10:57:21 -0700
Cc: Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org>, Linux MIPS Mailing List <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=G7G2qb3LaY7B8JdglXAH0q9nFAmpauXTuEbWBhboAHM=; b=yMDTAV/9UpzPbgandv0oIfrntCZ+yhdu99bAr/S2CSJbpe/O+BKiQSzUp0pEBAQR+E ghGKoXGrbnw3/MrLb5uyorZFnBnY3CjAVDsVFn7N0nxkracV710fckFpAANMyTgQxgg+ DA9BRJWDkB7+3VpuQJq0asxiM+G8NbOmuFsKNh4et9AulgnvbED6oE92IDS7qnJN4WA+ Usgi8RP92FB+k4ygw7Nz+iFr7Yd2NY276QucuEsNnDeBr1qlsT13TFA4LXGhJMYT7vrH ajoPwtlexpM8IHcrVe8V+eYARQE01n5HKWFQ4/3KduOplZyrybzAMJ8Ti/3wCV0NMZo/ TVmQ==
In-reply-to: <5221C3FC.7090608@phrozen.org>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1375350938-16554-1-git-send-email-jogo@openwrt.org> <20130801135505.GA3466@linux-mips.org> <CAOiHx=kZuzVu=ung9suwuoYr7F5LP-ghNFzwVSM_Zrc3i+=Q-g@mail.gmail.com> <5221C3FC.7090608@phrozen.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 3:22 AM, John Crispin <john@phrozen.org> wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
> Hi Florian,
>
>
>>> +       write_c0_ddatalo(3);
>>
>> I guess this needs to be write_c0_ddatalo(data);
>
> any comments on this ?

Commit 43d309390349010cd384ab5a0feebf16b03b9a94 from the
mips-for-linux-next branch has this fix (and the __ssnop -> _ssnop
renaming).  From comparing the assembly output it looks OK to me.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>