On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:10:10PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 9 March 2017 at 19:38, Jose Ricardo Ziviani
> <jos...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > This commit set Makefile to point to ppc64le source for both archs
> > (ppc64 and ppc64le) because they do the exact same thing. The
> > difference is in risugen and how the binary is build.
>
> If we're going to share a single set of source files for ppc64le
> and ppc64 (which makes sense) then I think we should use ARCH=ppc64
> for that, and rename the 'ppc64le' source files to 'ppc64'.
>
Your idea makes more sense. I'll do that and send another patch
tomorrow morning.
Thank you Peter!
> The rest of these patches look OK.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Jose Ricardo Ziviani <jos...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > configure | 9 ++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/configure b/configure
> > index 055e6d6..dd64d8b 100755
> > --- a/configure
> > +++ b/configure
> > @@ -51,11 +51,7 @@ guess_arch() {
> > elif check_define __aarch64__ ; then
> > ARCH="aarch64"
> > elif check_define __powerpc64__ ; then
> > - if check_define __BIG_ENDIAN__; then
> > - ARCH="ppc64"
> > - else
> > - ARCH="ppc64le"
> > - fi
> > + ARCH="ppc64le"
> > else
> > echo "This cpu is not supported by risu. Try -h. " >&2
> > exit 1
> > @@ -127,6 +123,9 @@ OBJDUMP="${OBJDUMP-${CROSS_PREFIX}objdump}"
> >
> > if test "x${ARCH}" = "x"; then
> > guess_arch
> > +elif test "x${ARCH}" = "xppc64"; then
> > + # ppc64 and ppc64le uses the same C source code
> > + ARCH="ppc64le"
> > fi
> >
> > generate_makefilein
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >
>
> Incidentally, maybe we should just drop support for
> specifying ARCH= manually to configure. I can't really
> see a use case where the auto-detection won't do the
> right thing.
>
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
