On Tue, 23 May 2017, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > Hardcode the absence of the MIPS16e2 ASE for all the systems that do so > > for the MIPS16 ASE already, providing for code to be optimized away. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Could you switch to using git format-patch such that we have a diffstat > at the beginning of the patch which helps the reviewer figure out which > files are being touched? My workflow that I have found efficient and I have been using for years now does not involve using GIT for outstanding patch management, so I don't think I can adjust to your request easily, without losing that efficiency or introducing processing errors from the additional final GIT import step. However separate `diffstat' information is redundant in that it is already carried by the patch itself and can be easily recreated by piping the containing e-mail to `diffstat' from the MUA while reading the message. Is that a solution that would work for you? > It just occurred to me that a bunch of other platforms are lacking a > cpu-feature-overrides.h file, but presumably would never be able to > support mips16e2, like ar7, emma2rh, pnx833x and so on. I have explicitly noted in the change description that only platforms that already have an override for the base MIPS16 ASE have been changed (for consistency, anyway). It's an optimisation only anyway, not a correctness issue. If there are platforms that may or may not have the MIPS16 ASE available, however are known to never have the MIPS16e2 ASE in the future, e.g. because they have been already obsoleted and no new CPU modules will ever be introduced, then the respective platform maintainers can add an override if desired. Maciej
