From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:37268)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1RarKI-0003jk-1M
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:05:08 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1RarKD-0001Dd-HW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:05:01 -0500
Received: from mail-qw0-f52.google.com ([209.85.216.52]:49067)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1RarKD-0001DY-FD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 11:04:57 -0500
Received: by qadc11 with SMTP id c11so630228qad.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:04:56 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EE8C923.2070905@twiddle.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:04:51 -0800
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1323321912-15922-1-git-send-email-khansa@kics.edu.pk>
	<1323321912-15922-2-git-send-email-khansa@kics.edu.pk>
	<4EE0D4AD.5060604@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <4EE0D4AD.5060604@web.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] linux-user:Support for MIPS64 user
 mode emulation in QEMU
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <andreas.faerber@web.de>
Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, riku.voipio@iki.fi, khansa@kics.edu.pk, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, aurelien@aurel32.net

On 12/08/2011 07:15 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> For linux-user IIUC the ABI is relevant, so shouldn't this be
> mipsn64-linux-user? We have a patch for mipsn32/mipsn32el. What about
> mipsn64el?

The compiler flags are -mabi={32,n32,64,o64}, so no, not "n64".
But yes, we should have an "el" version.

>> +#if defined(TARGET_MIPS64)
> TARGET_ABI_MIPSN64?
> 

Definitely.


r~