From: Greg Ungerer <gerg@snapgear.com>
To: Gavin Lambert <gavinl@compacsort.com>
Cc: 'uClinux development list' <uclinux-dev@uclinux.org>,
'Andreas Schwab' <schwab@linux-m68k.org>,
linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, 'Greg Ungerer' <gerg@uclinux.org>
Subject: Re: [uClinux-dev] Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] m68k: remove duplicate memcpy() implementation
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:30:02 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DDE39BA.2060903@snapgear.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <08eb01cc1b76$89d0dfc0$9d729f40$@com>
Hi Gavin,
On 26/05/11 17:28, Gavin Lambert wrote:
> Quoth Greg Ungerer:
>> On 24/05/11 18:06, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>> Geert Uytterhoeven<geert@linux-m68k.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> What exactly do you mean by "does not support anything less"? It
>>>> seems it does restrict instruction generation to 68000 if you
>>>> ask for it.
>>>
>>> The point is that Linux/m68k requires 68020+, so compiling for 68000
>>> does not make sense (at least back when the gcc configuration was
>>> created).
>>
>> Yeah, used to be true :-)
>> This seems very much to me to be a "broken compiler" issue.
>
> Hmm, that has me worried a little. I was thinking about trying to use gcc
> for a (non-Linux) M68000 device.
>
> Does the above mean that this would be problematic?
It seems to have been fixed in newer versions of gcc.
My current 4.5.1 generates only the defines I would expect
based on the supplied machine type options.
Regards
Greg
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-26 11:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-21 0:24 [PATCH v3 0/6] m68knommu: merge and clean up of arch/m68k/lib files gerg
2011-04-21 0:24 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] m68k: merge mmu and non-mmu versions of muldi3 gerg
2011-04-21 0:24 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] m68k: merge mmu and non-mmu versions of lib/Makefile gerg
2011-04-21 0:24 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] m68k: remove duplicate memmove() implementation gerg
2011-04-21 0:24 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] m68k: remove duplicate memset() implementation gerg
2011-04-21 0:24 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] m68k: remove duplicate memcpy() implementation gerg
2011-04-21 0:24 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] m68k: let Makefile sort out compiling mmu and non-mmu lib/checksum.c gerg
2011-05-23 19:26 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] m68k: remove duplicate memcpy() implementation Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-05-23 19:54 ` Andreas Schwab
2011-05-23 23:55 ` Greg Ungerer
2011-05-24 7:34 ` Andreas Schwab
2011-05-24 7:51 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-05-24 8:06 ` Andreas Schwab
2011-05-26 6:23 ` Greg Ungerer
2011-05-26 6:38 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-06-02 5:18 ` Greg Ungerer
2011-06-02 7:43 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-06-02 12:34 ` Greg Ungerer
2011-05-26 7:28 ` Gavin Lambert
2011-05-26 11:30 ` Greg Ungerer [this message]
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=4DDE39BA.2060903@snapgear.com \
--to=gerg@snapgear.com \
--cc=gavinl@compacsort.com \
--cc=gerg@uclinux.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schwab@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=uclinux-dev@uclinux.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox