On Sep 18, 2007, at 10:23 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:19:05AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> Mainly that 8xx has been doing this for a vast number of years and I
>> see no reason to stop doing it at this point.
>>
>> While I can see that it might be misleading, clearly 8xx lin
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:19:05AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> Mainly that 8xx has been doing this for a vast number of years and I
> see no reason to stop doing it at this point.
>
> While I can see that it might be misleading, clearly 8xx linux users
> haven't had issues with it.
Or they hav
On Sep 18, 2007, at 10:11 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:08:50AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 17, 2007, at 11:57 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>
>>> On arch/ppc, Soft_emulate_8xx was used when full math emulation was
>>> turned off to emulate a minimal subset of floating poi
On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 10:08:50AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Sep 17, 2007, at 11:57 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>
> >On arch/ppc, Soft_emulate_8xx was used when full math emulation was
> >turned off to emulate a minimal subset of floating point load/store
> >instructions, to avoid needing a soft-
On Sep 17, 2007, at 11:57 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On arch/ppc, Soft_emulate_8xx was used when full math emulation was
> turned off to emulate a minimal subset of floating point load/store
> instructions, to avoid needing a soft-float toolchain. This function
> is called, but not present, on arch
On arch/ppc, Soft_emulate_8xx was used when full math emulation was
turned off to emulate a minimal subset of floating point load/store
instructions, to avoid needing a soft-float toolchain. This function
is called, but not present, on arch/powerpc, causing a build error
if floating point emulatio
