On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 10:56 AM Richard Henderson < richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 9/8/22 09:23, Christoph Müllner wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 9:46 AM Richard Henderson < > richard.hender...@linaro.org > > <mailto:richard.hender...@linaro.org>> wrote: > > > > On 9/6/22 13:22, Christoph Muellner wrote: > > > + DEFINE_CPU(TYPE_RISCV_CPU_THEAD_C906, > rv64_thead_c906_cpu_init), > > > + DEFINE_CPU(TYPE_RISCV_CPU_THEAD_C910, > rv64_thead_c906_cpu_init), > > > > Why model both if they're identical? > > > > > > I figured that users might expect that (existence of "thead-c906" and > "thead-c910"). > > And using "thead-c9xx" feels like it would be regretted in the future. > > > > Should I drop "thead-c910"? > > Quite possibly. For Arm, we don't try to supply every cpu model, only > those that differ > in some substantial way. > Ok, will do. Thanks! > > > r~ >
