From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pj1-x1030.google.com (mail-pj1-x1030.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1030]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E69E5385840F for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 15:12:07 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org E69E5385840F Received: by mail-pj1-x1030.google.com with SMTP id bx5so5112333pjb.3 for ; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 08:12:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uCFakmT+UAohZDmtU3Thz5qXsqV7kWIX0OQjnFGIU+4=; b=2Lvo1qrMlUrego8EYM8Ho7Z+3aIoEUT3VDxV0IbvRkREtAtlx55Rdfhv3/+/mQNq9w dXNyv/HuBaw4xyrcpaWfX9jGQGGsDFIlFoYjfVWzYntO6vmiDGVTPUbgDjDioomMd+oL +GexdB9tj2J03kmubyrwPzDGiKWkwF6bLUR2ejqDpRIm2Pd4GANPqCHQGJSJJzlvwdBE XbC+vB1c4szFa/VymmaGmDNVjXT+ustIQOvibt74d/Utt1WBjF33nTVsgAT5vXeCraPn aav1Ni+l+tpshoE9EOAIhr9qlxSJNNNQPmmmhhH+GEMSFuB9TD73UYLU6dRZHsR+acwd wwAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531S9+XAFUFID2c2Ix7M0kGFUGa172WNcTj8FlHGyi7ASOTd1mF0 pHamOV5jVKk7R378S2vGhxHntTHl3SYkxKofsxmVnSrGN9M= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxHyADDRDOP/wbml4WgW0R7Zi5UFPtfohqd41esozyycOUsAON0F2TYMtFqgcX8bEz0or+0LUyrqrV7qBBSyUM= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3e8b:b0:1c6:a5f6:1ccd with SMTP id rj11-20020a17090b3e8b00b001c6a5f61ccdmr185845pjb.120.1647529926865; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 08:12:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <93cecdf2-b805-4508-9e34-89fd0011ccc9@suse.com> In-Reply-To: From: "H.J. Lu" Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 08:11:31 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86: drop L1OM/K1OM from gas plus associated tidying To: Jan Beulich Cc: Binutils Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3019.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: binutils@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Binutils mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 15:12:09 -0000 On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 1:32 AM Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 16.03.2022 18:11, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 1:42 AM Jan Beulich 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. > > Thanks. I realize only now that I should also update gas/doc/ in > patch 2. I'll assume that's fine to slip in, for only being > consistent. Yes, please. > > Can you also remove L1OM/K1OM from ld and binutils? > > I have to admit that I wasn't sure how far to go: Removing support > from ld certainly makes sense (and I'll see to find time), but > wouldn't it be reasonable to keep the minimal support there is in > binutils/? I don't think we need to support more than EM_L1OM and EM_K1OM, similar to EM_INTELGT. > I've noticed there's one piece of special casing behavior for L1OM > in i386-dis.c. I'd be inclined to drop that too - thoughts? Yes. -- H.J.