On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 03:20:18PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 2:56 PM Segher Boessenkool
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 06:43:05AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > > On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:03:38 -0700
> > > Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry I forgot
On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 06:43:05AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:03:38 -0700
> Nick Desaulniers wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 9:07 PM Joel Stanley wrote:
> > > Last time this was proposed there was an issue reported:
> > >
> > >
> > >
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:03:38 -0700
Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 9:07 PM Joel Stanley wrote:
> > Last time this was proposed there was an issue reported:
> >
> > https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2014-September/121214.html
> >
>
> Heh, did PASemi sell
On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 13:36:49 +0930
Joel Stanley wrote:
> This effectively reverts 7563dc645853 ("powerpc: Work around gcc's
> -fno-omit-frame-pointer bug"), a workaround for a bug in GCC 4.1.3 when
> building 2.6.26 kernel.
>
> The flag is not supported by clang, but reading the history of the
This effectively reverts 7563dc645853 ("powerpc: Work around gcc's
-fno-omit-frame-pointer bug"), a workaround for a bug in GCC 4.1.3 when
building 2.6.26 kernel.
The flag is not supported by clang, but reading the history of the
bug[1] suggests it is no longer required by supported GCC versions,
