Linux MIPS Architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>, <linux-mips@fnet.fr>,
	<linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>, "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@uni-koblenz.de>
Subject: Re: [patch] linux: cpu_probe(): remove 32-bit CPU bits for MIPS64
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 16:38:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <003b01c23256$b262f080$1604c0d8@Ulysses> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.GSO.3.96.1020722222909.2373P-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl

>  There is no need to carry support for pure 32-bit CPUs around in
> cpu_probe() in arch/mips64/kernel/setup.c, since such CPUs are not
> supported by the port and likely won't ever reach that code due to a
> reserved instruction exception earlier.  The code is misleading and a
> possible cause of troubles, e.g. the 2.4 branch doesn't link now because
> of an unresolved reference to cpu_has_fpu() which is only needed for
> R2000/R3000. 
> 
>  The following patch removes the code for 2.4.  For the trunk
> cpu_has_fpu() would be removed as well.  Any objections?

I'm on the road and don't have ready access to the sources,
but if I understand you correctly, I object.  The MIPS 5Kc and 
the NEC Vr41xx are two examples of 64-bit CPUs which don't 
have FPUs, and I believe there is at least one other from
Toshiba. (Tx49-something-or-other).

My personal bleief is that the mips and mips64 trees 
should ultimately be merged, and that creating additional 
and gratuitous differences should be avoided.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>,
	linux-mips@fnet.fr, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@uni-koblenz.de>
Subject: Re: [patch] linux: cpu_probe(): remove 32-bit CPU bits for MIPS64
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 16:38:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <003b01c23256$b262f080$1604c0d8@Ulysses> (raw)
Message-ID: <20020723143858.KaIyqAw7w3v6VUI-OSbutSnyD0HTucHt9qzp9SjXYTA@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Pine.GSO.3.96.1020722222909.2373P-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl

>  There is no need to carry support for pure 32-bit CPUs around in
> cpu_probe() in arch/mips64/kernel/setup.c, since such CPUs are not
> supported by the port and likely won't ever reach that code due to a
> reserved instruction exception earlier.  The code is misleading and a
> possible cause of troubles, e.g. the 2.4 branch doesn't link now because
> of an unresolved reference to cpu_has_fpu() which is only needed for
> R2000/R3000. 
> 
>  The following patch removes the code for 2.4.  For the trunk
> cpu_has_fpu() would be removed as well.  Any objections?

I'm on the road and don't have ready access to the sources,
but if I understand you correctly, I object.  The MIPS 5Kc and 
the NEC Vr41xx are two examples of 64-bit CPUs which don't 
have FPUs, and I believe there is at least one other from
Toshiba. (Tx49-something-or-other).

My personal bleief is that the mips and mips64 trees 
should ultimately be merged, and that creating additional 
and gratuitous differences should be avoided.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-07-23 14:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-07-23 11:55 [patch] linux: cpu_probe(): remove 32-bit CPU bits for MIPS64 Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-07-23 12:14 ` Ralf Baechle
2002-07-23 13:05   ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-07-23 13:23     ` Ralf Baechle
2002-07-23 13:31       ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-07-23 13:59         ` Ralf Baechle
2002-07-23 18:20     ` Jun Sun
2002-07-24 15:11       ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-07-23 14:38 ` Kevin D. Kissell [this message]
2002-07-23 14:38   ` Kevin D. Kissell
2002-07-23 14:49   ` Ralf Baechle
2002-07-23 16:00   ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-07-23 21:13     ` Kevin D. Kissell
2002-07-24 14:52       ` Ralf Baechle
2002-07-24 15:05         ` Maciej W. Rozycki

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='003b01c23256$b262f080$1604c0d8@Ulysses' \
    --to=kevink@mips.com \
    --cc=linux-mips@fnet.fr \
    --cc=linux-mips@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl \
    --cc=ralf@uni-koblenz.de \
    /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