OK, I will resend this patch after a long time, until no applications be broken. BTW, can these two patches be merged? or do they have problems to be fix? http://patchwork.linux-mips.org/patch/11272/ http://patchwork.linux-mips.org/patch/11273/ ------------------ Original ------------------ From: "Ralf Baechle"<ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, Nov 10, 2015 07:12 PM To: "Huacai Chen"<chenhc@xxxxxxxxxx>; Cc: "John Crispin"<john@xxxxxxxxxxx>; "Steven J. Hill"<Steven.Hill@xxxxxxxxxx>; "linux-mips"<linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Fuxin Zhang"<zhangfx@xxxxxxxxxx>; "wuzhangjin"<wuzhangjin@xxxxxxxxx>; Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] MIPS: Loongson: Make CPU names more clear On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:08:02PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: > Make names in /proc/cpuinfo more human-readable, Since GCC support the > new-style names for a long time, this may not break -march=native any > more. I do understand why you want to make this change - but things in proc including CPU names are interfaces and those are cast in stone. You can't just call a potatoe a cherry today :-) Unless you have a good reason which would include demonstrating that is not breaking any existing application code? Ralf_��{����b����b��w^���*l��)�����+�����)��������*l���+��j_�^��\�W���r����������f���yƫ�+��)�����ҹ��zZ�.+-��� �&����X�� 抛������˺{.n�����b��*l�~�����ޮȨ�_���w��*l�X�� 抛�y�{��*l���ˊ� ?���h����*l��{��h������� �&����X�� 抛������˲���{����� ޯ��m���{��h��������f����)�����{��h��������������{��h���r�z��{��h����X����*l---
