On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 02:25:13PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > Do we have anything to say here? I don't think there are any major > > plans with regards to MIPS, are there? > > * Switch the default ABI to mips2 instead of the current mips1 ABI. The > mips1 ABI corresponds to R3000 CPUs that we don't support anymore for > a lot of time. This lead us to writing ugly patches using ".set mips > 2" when using ll/sc instructions for atomic code in some packages. > > This should only be only change in GCC that I plan to do unless someone > else volunteer. You mean switching to N32 instead O32? There is no point in switching to mips2 just for dropping the little patches. If we start changing something we should drop mips1 aka r3k/32bit support (And early R4k with 64bit bugs) and switch to n32 using a more efficient ABI. Flo -- Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org "Es ist ein grobes Missverständnis und eine Fehlwahrnehmung, dem Staat im Internet Zensur- und Überwachungsabsichten zu unterstellen." - - Bundesminister Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble -- 10. Juli in Berlin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature