From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@sifive.com>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/12] lib/raid6: Use CC_FLAGS_FPU for NEON CFLAGS
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 08:07:19 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZXczty+Y6dTDL4Xi@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231208055501.2916202-6-samuel.holland@sifive.com>
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon1.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon2.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon4.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon8.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
Btw, do we even really need the extra variables for compiler flags
to remove? Don't gcc/clang options work so that if you add a
no-prefixed version of the option later it transparently gets removed?
Except for that:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@sifive.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/12] lib/raid6: Use CC_FLAGS_FPU for NEON CFLAGS
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 08:07:19 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZXczty+Y6dTDL4Xi@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231208055501.2916202-6-samuel.holland@sifive.com>
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon1.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon2.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon4.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon8.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
Btw, do we even really need the extra variables for compiler flags
to remove? Don't gcc/clang options work so that if you add a
no-prefixed version of the option later it transparently gets removed?
Except for that:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@sifive.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/12] lib/raid6: Use CC_FLAGS_FPU for NEON CFLAGS
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 08:07:19 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZXczty+Y6dTDL4Xi@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231208055501.2916202-6-samuel.holland@sifive.com>
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon1.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon2.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon4.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon8.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
Btw, do we even really need the extra variables for compiler flags
to remove? Don't gcc/clang options work so that if you add a
no-prefixed version of the option later it transparently gets removed?
Except for that:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@sifive.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, x86@kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 05/12] lib/raid6: Use CC_FLAGS_FPU for NEON CFLAGS
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 08:07:19 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZXczty+Y6dTDL4Xi@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231208055501.2916202-6-samuel.holland@sifive.com>
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon1.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon2.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon4.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
> +CFLAGS_REMOVE_neon8.o += $(CC_FLAGS_NO_FPU)
Btw, do we even really need the extra variables for compiler flags
to remove? Don't gcc/clang options work so that if you add a
no-prefixed version of the option later it transparently gets removed?
Except for that:
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-11 16:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 133+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-08 5:54 [RFC PATCH 00/12] Unified cross-architecture kernel-mode FPU API Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] arch: Add ARCH_HAS_KERNEL_FPU_SUPPORT Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:02 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] ARM: Implement ARCH_HAS_KERNEL_FPU_SUPPORT Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] ARM: crypto: Use CC_FLAGS_FPU for NEON CFLAGS Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] arm64: Implement ARCH_HAS_KERNEL_FPU_SUPPORT Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-13 16:19 ` Will Deacon
2023-12-13 16:19 ` Will Deacon
2023-12-13 16:19 ` Will Deacon
2023-12-13 16:19 ` Will Deacon
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] lib/raid6: Use CC_FLAGS_FPU for NEON CFLAGS Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2023-12-11 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:12 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:12 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:12 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:12 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-12 7:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-12 7:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-12 7:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-12 7:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 06/12] LoongArch: Implement ARCH_HAS_KERNEL_FPU_SUPPORT Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-13 16:13 ` WANG Xuerui
2023-12-13 16:13 ` WANG Xuerui
2023-12-13 16:13 ` WANG Xuerui
2023-12-13 16:13 ` WANG Xuerui
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] powerpc: " Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 08/12] x86: " Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 09/12] riscv: Add support for kernel-mode FPU Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:16 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:16 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:16 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:16 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] drm/amd/display: Use ARCH_HAS_KERNEL_FPU_SUPPORT Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 12:23 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-12-11 12:23 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-12-11 12:23 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-12-11 12:23 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-12-14 1:03 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-14 1:03 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-14 1:03 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-14 1:03 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-14 3:13 ` Timothy Pearson
2023-12-14 3:13 ` Timothy Pearson
2023-12-14 3:13 ` Timothy Pearson
2023-12-14 3:13 ` Timothy Pearson
2023-12-14 3:13 ` Timothy Pearson
2023-12-14 4:45 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-12-14 4:45 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-12-14 4:45 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-12-14 4:45 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] selftests/fpu: Move FP code to a separate translation unit Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:18 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-08 5:54 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] selftests/fpu: Allow building on other architectures Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-08 5:54 ` Samuel Holland
2023-12-11 16:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-12-11 16:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZXczty+Y6dTDL4Xi@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=samuel.holland@sifive.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.