Subject: Re: Linux 2.1.131 ARM patches released

From: [email-masked] (Matthew Wilcox)
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 03:14:27 +0100 (CET)

> >However, this is not right in all cases (RiscPC for instance, should not
> >report v3 because it's not capable of the v4 instruction set).

> It's still a v4 processor (can do UMULL and so on), and I suspect RiscPCs are
> in the minority of StrongARM machines now.  I'll add a special case to
> identify those though.

Why not ID them as one of the v3 variants that can do extended multiply?
Something like v3L?  I don't have the ARM ARM but I remember reading about
this once somewhere...

unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [email-masked]

---

From: Philip Blundell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 10:27:26 +0100

>Something like v3L?  I don't have the ARM ARM but I remember reading about

Yes, that might be a good plan.

p.

---

From: Russell King <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 14:22:48 +0000 (GMT)

> Yes, that might be a good plan.

The code is mostly there already - just add the relevent HWCAP definitions.

--
Russell King ([email-masked])