On 12 May 2017 at 13:35, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Nicholas Piggin writes:
>
> > The single-operand form of tlbie used to be accepted as the second
> > operand (L) being implicitly 0. Newer binutils reject this.
> >
> > Change remaining single-op tlbie instructions to have explicit 0
> > second
Nicholas Piggin writes:
> The single-operand form of tlbie used to be accepted as the second
> operand (L) being implicitly 0. Newer binutils reject this.
>
> Change remaining single-op tlbie instructions to have explicit 0
> second argument.
Do old(er) binutils accept the two operand version?
The single-operand form of tlbie used to be accepted as the second
operand (L) being implicitly 0. Newer binutils reject this.
Change remaining single-op tlbie instructions to have explicit 0
second argument.
Cc: Scott Wood
Cc: Christophe Leroy
Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin
---
arch/powerpc/
