Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] Loongson-2F: Enable fixups of binutils 2.20.1

[zhangfx <zhangfx@lemote.com>]

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