From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from de01egw02.freescale.net (de01egw02.freescale.net [192.88.165.103]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "de01egw02.freescale.net", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AB34DDE3E for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 01:23:12 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:23:02 -0500 From: Scott Wood To: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/28] 8xx: Don't call non-existent Soft_emulate_8xx from SoftwareEmulation. Message-ID: <20070918152302.GB788@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> References: <20070917165746.GP6563@loki.buserror.net> <58472170-34D3-43F4-A816-87AF0020A086@kernel.crashing.org> <20070918151147.GB736@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> <027F3363-3154-4A16-A251-C56D8DC339A1@kernel.crashing.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <027F3363-3154-4A16-A251-C56D8DC339A1@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:19:05AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > Mainly that 8xx has been doing this for a vast number of years and I > see no reason to stop doing it at this point. > > While I can see that it might be misleading, clearly 8xx linux users > haven't had issues with it. Or they haven't said anything. :-P How about a three-way choice of full emulation, minimal emulation, and no emulation? -Scott