On 26 May 2015 at 09:01, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:18 AM, Peter Maydell > <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 26 May 2015 at 06:49, Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaitepe...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> From: Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaitepe...@gmail.com> >>> >>> The "arm" variant for this case already contains everything needed >>> for aarch64. As aarch64 already uses arm as a base architecture, it >>> will already have the CONFIG_ARM_DIS defined meaning no functional >>> change. So just make the configure code simpler. >> >> I'm wondering why we needed to put the A64 disassembler into >> the "arm" variant at all... >> > > That probably works too. I'm trying to get rid of the dup. respin it?
I think it would look more like the other entries in the case statement, so worth trying. Maybe we'll find out why it's done this way :-) -- PMM
