On Wed, 13 May 2020, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > I think that the e200 support was never contributed upstream. > > > > Or rather, it wasn't accepted. Cf. > > <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg00427.html>, > > <http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/gcc/patch/50491be2.2020...@codesourcery.com/>. > > There never has been a patch adding support for e200 submitted. Only > patches mixing that with a lot of other stuff, like VLE support, which > was not acceptable in that shape at all.
Well, e200 parts are VLE ISA implementations, some of which solely (e200z0), so to claim specific e200 support we'd have to have VLE support first anyway, even if submitted separately. > It takes time and effort to not make something like this take (ongoing!) > huge time and effort from others. Sure, I just think we need to get the facts straight. And I gave pointers in case someone came across this discussion sometime and wanted to use that stuff locally. Maciej
