Re: [PATCH] MIPS: microMIPS ASE support

["Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@codesourcery.com>]

On Sun, 24 Jul 2011, Richard Sandiford wrote:

> Continuing this thread from March:
> 
> Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford@googlemail.com> writes:
> > "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@codesourcery.com> writes:
> >>  As it has turned out in the course of sorting out some earlier concerns 
> >> the microMIPS change needs a couple of updates.  For your reference I'm 
> >> sending the current version of the original patch as it had to be 
> >> regenerated.  On top of this I'm sending the following updates:
> >
> > Everything except binutils-gas-umips-swap.diff is OK (as one commit,
> > like you say), with the changes below.
> 
> It seemed a shame to get to the point of an approved version and not
> actually commit it.  I've now updated and regenerated the patch series,
> made the changes from this approval, and applied a few other things I
> noticed.  I've attached the three patches separately.

 Ouch, that'll cause me a lot of work to resolve merge conflicts.  I have 
updated all the patches independently before I went on holiday last week, 
so that's duplicated work too.  Plus there's some stuff accumulated 
earlier on.

> Tested on 
> 
>   mips64-elf mips64el-unknown-kfreebsd-gnu mips64-linux-gnu
>   mips64octeon-linux-gnu mips64-unknown-kfreebsd-gnu
>   mipsel-unknown-kfreebsd-gnu mipsisa32el-linux-gnu mipsisa64-elf
>   mips-linux-gnu mips-unknown-kfreebsd-gnu mips-wrs-vxworks
> 
> Applied to trunk along with:
> 
>   http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2010-12/msg00399.html
>   http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-02/msg00318.html

 My understanding has been you didn't consider the latter a complete 
change (and frankly I did wholeheartedly agree).

> Maciej: I regenerated and updated each of your patches separately,
> so if you'd like a copy of those individual patches, I can send them
> privately.

 Yes, please -- that'll save me a lot of hassle with conflict resolution, 
though I fear that'll be painful anyway. :(

> I went on to say:
> 
> > If you don't agree with some of the requested changes, let me know.
> 
> and I gather from an off-list discussion a couple of months ago that
> there were indeed some things that you didn't like.  But I think it'd
> be easier to deal with them as follow-ups.  Please feel free to send
> patches against trunk.  Or, if you tell me what it is you disagree with,
> I can try to fix it myself.

 I guess I'll just send off the e-mail I had been writing but never 
actually completed.  My current state of the changes includes all my 
updates that reflect the points made, but now I'll have to regenerate 
them, possibly by reverting yours, applying mine on top and figuring out 
what differences to the original remain.  Oh well...

> I'm sure there are things that we've both missed, but again,
> we can deal with them as follow-ups.

 There's a whole lot of important linker relaxation fixes that I reckon 
were not included in the original series plus several bug fixes.

> Last, but not least, thanks for all your hard work on this series.
> Thanks especially for perservering in the face of all my annoying
> niggles. :-)

 You are welcome.

  Maciej