[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1kE0FAbeUoO-JwzHKPsDVyTT7GGCsLoow=V2zKdSr0_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 10:16:18 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Wei Fu <wefu@...hat.com>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
Christoph Muellner <cmuellner@...ux.com>,
Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@...ll.eu>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Drew Fustini <drew@...gleboard.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/4] riscv: implement cache-management errata for
T-Head SoCs
On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 2:28 AM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com> wrote:
> I know I said I really don't want the executable .long stuff for this,
> and IIRC that's a pretty common sentiment. I'm not sure if I'm just fed
> up with all the craziness, but I'm kind of inclined to just merge this
> as-is -- at least that way we can get the hardware working.
There is usually not much choice here if you want to allow building
with older toolchains. You might want to add a comment for each one
of those to reference the (projected) binutils version that adds support
so it can be cleaned up after you raise the minimum toolchain
requirements, but that takes years.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists