Matthew Fortune writes:
>> I suppose we'll need a way of specifying an isa_rev range, say
>> "isa_rev=2-5". That should be a fairly localised change though.
>
> There appear to be about 9 tests that are not fixed by educating mips.exp
> about flags which are not supported on R6. Steve has initial
On Mon, 2014-06-23 at 03:31 -0700, Matthew Fortune wrote:
> > > Recommendations on how to rework the mips.exp logic to cope with this
> > > would be appreciated.
> >
> > Could you give an example of the kind of thing you mean?
>
> You have actually covered the cases I was concerned about below.
Richard Sandiford writes:
> Sorry for the slow review.
And my slow response :-)
> Matthew Fortune writes:
> > The initial support for MIP64r6 is intentionally minimal to make
> review
> > easier. Performance enhancements and use of new MIPS64r6 features will
> > be introduced separately. The cu
Just to correct myself here:
Richard Sandiford writes:
> The:
>
> # Handle dependencies between the pre-arch options and the arch option.
> # This should mirror the arch and post-arch code below.
> if { !$arch_test_option_p } {
>
> block should start with something like:
>
> if
Sorry for the slow review.
Matthew Fortune writes:
> The initial support for MIP64r6 is intentionally minimal to make review
> easier. Performance enhancements and use of new MIPS64r6 features will
> be introduced separately. The current patch makes no attempt to
> get the testsuite appropriately
