On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Andreas Barth <aba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> * Matt Turner (mattst88@xxxxxxxxx) [110822 02:20]:
>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Andreas Barth <aba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > 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
