[PATCH 0/6] x86: drop L1OM/K1OM from gas plus associated tidying
H.J. Lu
hjl.tools@gmail.com
Wed Mar 16 17:11:27 GMT 2022
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Wed Mar 16 17:11:27 GMT 2022
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH 6/6] x86: don't accept base architectures as extensions
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH 0/6] x86: drop L1OM/K1OM from gas plus associated tidying
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 1:42 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote: > > It was the bugs / shortcomings dealt with here as a "side effect" > which made me raise the question of the utility of having the > rudimentary support for the two sub-architectures. Oddly enough > some of the bugs need fixing _before_ removing the support, or else > IAMCU would regress. Furthermore a new IAMCU test can be put in > place only _after_ removing the support. > > 1: assorted IAMCU CPU checking fixes > 2: drop L1OM/K1OM support from gas > 3: add another IAMCU testcase > 4: unify CPU flag on/off processing > 5: never set i386_cpu_flags' "unused" field > 6: don't accept base architectures as extensions > OK to all. Can you also remove L1OM/K1OM from ld and binutils? Thanks. -- H.J.
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH 6/6] x86: don't accept base architectures as extensions
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH 0/6] x86: drop L1OM/K1OM from gas plus associated tidying
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list