Re: [PATCH] mips/loongson: unify compiler flags and load location for Loongson 2E and 2F
From: Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>
Date: 2011-08-22 20:16:16
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Andreas Barth [off-list ref] wrote:
* Matt Turner (mattst88@gmail.com) [110822 02:20]:quoted
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Andreas Barth [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
diff --git a/arch/mips/loongson/Platform b/arch/mips/loongson/Platform index 29692e5..d6471a5 100644 --- a/arch/mips/loongson/Platform +++ b/arch/mips/loongson/Platform@@ -4,10 +4,8 @@# Only gcc >= 4.4 have Loongson specific support cflags-$(CONFIG_CPU_LOONGSON2) += -Wa,--trap -cflags-$(CONFIG_CPU_LOONGSON2E) += \ - $(call cc-option,-march=loongson2e,-march=r4600) -cflags-$(CONFIG_CPU_LOONGSON2F) += \ - $(call cc-option,-march=loongson2f,-march=r4600) +cflags-$(CONFIG_CPU_LOONGSON2) += \ + $(call cc-option,-march=r4600) # Enable the workarounds for Loongson2f ifdef CONFIG_CPU_LOONGSON2F_WORKAROUNDS ifeq ($(call as-option,-Wa$(comma)-mfix-loongson2f-nop,),)... but I don't understand this one. So, in the name of simplification, let's just remove the ability to compile with -march=loongson2{e,f}? What?I want to build a kernel that works on both 2e and 2f. Such a kernel must not be built with 2e or 2f specific code (which are incompatible to each other).
I understand the desire, but this is removing the ability to build the kernel with -march=loongson2e or -march=loongson2f. A Kconfig option should be added to allow building the kernel with -march=r4600 for generic Loongson2 compatibility if you want to build one kernel for 2e and 2f. Matt