On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 08:20:58PM +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 02:05:29PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > OK, so that needs to change. That's pretty easy to do, at least in our
> > local toolchains.
> If it's only in your local toolchains, it's lost. Send your changes to
> the FSF!
Of course. Let me clarify that statement - it's easy to do in a way
that would be acceptable in our local toolchains, and somewhat harder
to do in a way acceptable to the FSF.
In this case, though, not much harder. I'm going to try to have a
-mmad patch later today for binutils, and a trivial patch for GCC to
use it instead of -m4650.
> > If it does, I can probably whip up a -mmad patch to binutils to allow
> > those opcodes - or I could introduce -mnevada, or whatever the
> > appropriate term would be, to mean "r8000 with the mad* extensions".
> > In fact, that would probably be easiest, and sounds like the most
> > correct.
> Don't think of the r8000; the kernel only uses the -mcpu=r8000 option
> because the Nevada CPUs have _somewhat_ similar scheduling properties
> to the R8000. This of it as an independant ISA expension which can
> be used with an arbitrary MIPS processor - even a R3000 processor.
Oh, I see. Thanks for the clarification.
Daniel Jacobowitz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Monta Vista Software Debian Security Team
"I am croutons!"