From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Sun, 28 Mar 2010 00:18:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.lemote.com ([222.92.8.141]:57163 "EHLO lemote.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S1492208Ab0C0XSM convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Mar 2010 00:18:12 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lemote.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B92AE31C96F; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 07:15:12 +0800 (CST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at lemote.com Received: from lemote.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (www.lemote.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AyF34IhnFHE1; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 07:14:58 +0800 (CST) Received: from [172.16.1.86] (unknown [222.92.8.142]) by lemote.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AA2931C968; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 07:14:56 +0800 (CST) Message-ID: <4BAE920A.90404@lemote.com> Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 07:17:30 +0800 From: zhangfx User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091120) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ralf Baechle , Wu Zhangjin , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Shinya Kuribayashi , zhangfx@lemote.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] Loongson-2F: Enable fixups of binutils 2.20.1 References: <20100317135223.GA4554@linux-mips.org> <20100327162900.GA19154@woodpecker.gentoo.org> <20100327172059.GC19154@woodpecker.gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20100327172059.GC19154@woodpecker.gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 26331 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: zhangfx@lemote.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips The revision with these bugs fixed is 2F03. Up to now all processors used in current products are 2F01/02. 2F03 is in production and expected in this summer. Zhang Le wrote: > On 16:29 Sat 27 Mar , Zhang Le wrote: > >> On 14:52 Wed 17 Mar , Ralf Baechle wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:34:16PM +0800, Wu Zhangjin wrote: >>> >>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/mips/Makefile b/arch/mips/Makefile >>>> index 2f2eac2..5ae342e 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/mips/Makefile >>>> +++ b/arch/mips/Makefile >>>> @@ -135,7 +135,9 @@ cflags-$(CONFIG_CPU_LOONGSON2) += -Wa,--trap >>>> cflags-$(CONFIG_CPU_LOONGSON2E) += \ >>>> $(call cc-option,-march=loongson2e,-march=r4600) >>>> cflags-$(CONFIG_CPU_LOONGSON2F) += \ >>>> - $(call cc-option,-march=loongson2f,-march=r4600) >>>> + $(call cc-option,-march=loongson2f,-march=r4600) \ >>>> + $(call as-option,-Wa$(comma)-mfix-loongson2f-nop,) \ >>>> + $(call as-option,-Wa$(comma)-mfix-loongson2f-jump,) >>>> >>> Shouldn't these options be used unconditionally? It seems a kernel build >>> should rather fail than a possibly unreliable kernel be built - possibly >>> even without the user noticing the problem. >>> >> Zhangjin has been busy preparing for his graduation paper. >> I just talked to him. He said later batches of 2F processor is not affected by >> these two problems, according to Zhang Fuxin, manager of Lemote. >> >> I am not sure on which model of Fuloong and Yeeloong these "good" 2F processors >> have been used. I think Fuxin should know this. >> >> If Fuxin could told us now, we can make a new patch. In this patch, we decide >> whether to add these options or not base on the model number. >> >> Otherwise, for now, I think we should enable these options unconditionally. >> > > Sorry, I got Zhang Fuxin's email wrong. Now fixed. > > Zhang, Le > > -- 张福新 Zhang Fuxin 龙芯梦兰 管理部 总经理 Lemote General Manager zhangfx@lemote.com