On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 00:06:24 +, Paul Burton wrote:
> If you have related patches the best thing to do would be to submit them
> together as a series. Then after the maintainers involved can see the
> patches we can figure out the best way to apply them.
Right, in hindsight that could've worked
Hi Jakub,
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 03:55:45PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Dec 2018 22:42:04 +, Paul Burton wrote:
> > Jiong Wang wrote:
> > > For micro-mips, srlv inside POOL32A encoding space should use 0x50
> > > sub-opcode, NOT 0x90.
> > >
> > > Some early version ISA doc descr
On Mon, 3 Dec 2018 22:42:04 +, Paul Burton wrote:
> Jiong Wang wrote:
> > For micro-mips, srlv inside POOL32A encoding space should use 0x50
> > sub-opcode, NOT 0x90.
> >
> > Some early version ISA doc describes the encoding as 0x90 for both srlv and
> > srav, this looks to me was a typo. I ch
Hello,
Jiong Wang wrote:
> For micro-mips, srlv inside POOL32A encoding space should use 0x50
> sub-opcode, NOT 0x90.
>
> Some early version ISA doc describes the encoding as 0x90 for both srlv and
> srav, this looks to me was a typo. I checked Binutils libopcode
> implementation which is using 0
For micro-mips, srlv inside POOL32A encoding space should use 0x50
sub-opcode, NOT 0x90.
Some early version ISA doc describes the encoding as 0x90 for both srlv and
srav, this looks to me was a typo. I checked Binutils libopcode
implementation which is using 0x50 for srlv and 0x90 for srav.
v1->v
