From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id B227C385840F; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 22:48:32 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B227C385840F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1677019712;
	bh=ftMxZ+BsPefasQMKjhiGh7ooPBpwywYdzCz4pCIsJzI=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=ooQZN9USuO3jFzA6mDwr5Yo5s02ECDNBX0e8YaqMIqfmO3PNkKfd8L4AkLBwXerqr
	 L6rW+MWOfHQMVAzjCBRR1rXPwHqExm7ViCwmlSxlpIUG5Q+oANnabzl3z4sD+t4052
	 V2JR2NZY+aYUGakM5fIYufBpGnS895cNknXPgjy4=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/108853] Add new -mcpu=e500 alias for -mcpu=8540
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 22:48:32 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-108853-4-Tc6iOunrIw@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-108853-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-108853-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108853

--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Does anyone still use the e500 core? I thought the last SoC that had that c=
ore
was years ago and even no longer supported by FreeScale/NXP.=