Re: head: MIPS: Complete the R4000 multiply/shift errataworkaround

[cgd at broadcom dot com]

At Thu, 19 Feb 2004 19:44:45 +0100 (CET), Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>  I'm not sure if "-mfix-r4000" is the right name, though, as that would
> imply working around all problems with the processor.  And there is
> another problem that is common to both the R4000 and the R4400 (I have a
> patch in preparation, but it's not ready yet).  I think these options
> should operate on disjunctive sets of adjustments to code generation, not
> to lead to weird configurations like one that would happen with
> "-mfix-r4000 -mno-fix-r4400" in this case.

Well, my theory is that a flag should enable fixes, and only the
complementary flag should disable them.

The documentation should explain what is fixed by the flag.


If it's -mfix-r4000-foo and -mfix-r4000-bar or similar, that'd make
sense.

but IMO the flag should indicate what processor(s) the fix is for.  In
the case of similar bugs in similar processors, i'd say make the
documentation say something reasonable, and don't try to enumerate
all.  (esp. true for 4400, since it's not otherwise distinguished from
4000.)

Listing processor revisions in documentation seems quite reasonable to
me.  8-)




chris