On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Olof Kindgren <[email protected]> wrote: > 2012/1/17 [email protected] <[email protected]>: >> Hi all: >> >> I'm looking at this patch, applied not long ago: >> >> ORPSoC: Fix Bug 76 - Incorrect unsigned integer less-than compare with >> COMP3 option enabled >> OR1200 RTL fix and software test added. >> >> This patch landed in the OpenCores Subversion repository at this location: >> >> /openrisc/trunk/orpsocv2/rtl/verilog/or1200 >> >> However, I just realised that there is another copy of the OpenRISC core RTL >> at this location: >> >> /openrisc/trunk/or1200/rtl/verilog >> >> This copy does not seem to have been patched though. >> >> I think I've read in this forum that there is a similar issue with the GCC >> toolchain, there are at least 2 copies, is that right? >> >> I am confused about which copies I should be using at the moment. >> >> Thanks, >> R. Diez >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenRISC mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc >> > > You are right. I reopened bug bug 57 a few days ago > (http://bugzilla.opencores.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57) > This is not good, especially as we had the two code bases in sync > before that. Someone should patch this in the upstream core, and until > we only have a single one copy all patches should apply to both from > here on. I know that there is an argument for having ORPSoCv2-specific > patches, but I'm not really sure there are any real use cases for > that.
There's already a thread for this bug. See my last post on it: http://lists.openrisc.net/pipermail/openrisc/2011-December/000507.html I was waiting for someone else to confirm this bug is fixed before patching the upstream copy. But, totally agree on the issues relating to multiple copies and that having them is one of the worst things you can do. Julius _______________________________________________ OpenRISC mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc
