[RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Manuel Lauss]

With binutils snapshots since 29.07.2014 I get the following build failure:
{standard input}: Warning: .gnu_attribute 4,3 requires `softfloat'
  LD      arch/mips/alchemy/common/built-in.o
mipsel-softfloat-linux-gnu-ld: Warning: arch/mips/alchemy/common/built-in.o
 uses -msoft-float (set by arch/mips/alchemy/common/prom.o),
 arch/mips/alchemy/common/sleeper.o uses -mhard-float

Extend cflags with a soft-float directive for the assembler, and add
hardfloat directives to assembler files dealing with FPU
registers to compensate.

Signed-off-by: Manuel Lauss <manuel.lauss@gmail.com>
---
V2: cover more assembler files.

This was introduced in binutils commit  351cdf24d223290b15fa991e5052ec9e9bd1e284
("[MIPS] Implement O32 FPXX, FP64 and FP64A ABI extensions"), and it seems is only
a problem with my gcc 4.9 or a very recent snapshot of gcc-4.10.
With gcc-4.8, the source builds, with 4.9 it aborts after the above error,
with 4.10 (which apparently passes -msoft-float along to the assembler automatically)
the .hardfloat directives are required.

 arch/mips/Makefile              | 2 +-
 arch/mips/kernel/r2300_switch.S | 1 +
 arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S      | 1 +
 arch/mips/kernel/r4k_switch.S   | 1 +
 arch/mips/kernel/r6000_fpu.S    | 1 +
 5 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/Makefile b/arch/mips/Makefile
index 9336509..cffbd49 100644
--- a/arch/mips/Makefile
+++ b/arch/mips/Makefile
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ all-$(CONFIG_SYS_SUPPORTS_ZBOOT)+= vmlinuz
 # crossformat linking we rely on the elf2ecoff tool for format conversion.
 #
 cflags-y			+= -G 0 -mno-abicalls -fno-pic -pipe
-cflags-y			+= -msoft-float
+cflags-y			+= -msoft-float -Wa,-msoft-float
 LDFLAGS_vmlinux			+= -G 0 -static -n -nostdlib
 KBUILD_AFLAGS_MODULE		+= -mlong-calls
 KBUILD_CFLAGS_MODULE		+= -mlong-calls
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/r2300_switch.S b/arch/mips/kernel/r2300_switch.S
index 20b7b04..f33bf8b 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/r2300_switch.S
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/r2300_switch.S
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
 #include <asm/asmmacro.h>
 
 	.set	mips1
+	.set	hardfloat
 	.align	5
 
 /*
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S b/arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S
index 8352523..722962c 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
 
 	.macro	EX insn, reg, src
 	.set	push
+	.set	hardfloat
 	.set	nomacro
 .ex\@:	\insn	\reg, \src
 	.set	pop
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/r4k_switch.S b/arch/mips/kernel/r4k_switch.S
index 4c4ec18..5313b6f 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/r4k_switch.S
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/r4k_switch.S
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
  *		       struct thread_info *next_ti, s32 fp_save)
  */
 	.align	5
+	.set hardfloat
 	LEAF(resume)
 	mfc0	t1, CP0_STATUS
 	LONG_S	t1, THREAD_STATUS(a0)
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/r6000_fpu.S b/arch/mips/kernel/r6000_fpu.S
index da0fbe4..c13e3ff 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/r6000_fpu.S
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/r6000_fpu.S
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
 #include <asm/regdef.h>
 
 	.set	noreorder
+	.set	hardfloat
 	.set	mips2
 	/* Save floating point context */
 	LEAF(_save_fp_context)
-- 
2.0.4

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Ralf Baechle]

On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 06:27:12PM +0200, Manuel Lauss wrote:

> With binutils snapshots since 29.07.2014 I get the following build failure:
> {standard input}: Warning: .gnu_attribute 4,3 requires `softfloat'
>   LD      arch/mips/alchemy/common/built-in.o
> mipsel-softfloat-linux-gnu-ld: Warning: arch/mips/alchemy/common/built-in.o
>  uses -msoft-float (set by arch/mips/alchemy/common/prom.o),
>  arch/mips/alchemy/common/sleeper.o uses -mhard-float
> 
> Extend cflags with a soft-float directive for the assembler, and add
> hardfloat directives to assembler files dealing with FPU
> registers to compensate.

I had a discussion about this with Maciej.  He suggested that this
behavious of binutils should be taken a look at but also that we rather
should remove the -msoft-float option from the kernel and I support his
view.

I did add -msoft-float in 6218cf4410cfce7bc7e89834e73525b124625d4c
[[MIPS] Always pass -msoft-float.] in 2006 because back then there was a
wave of bug reports from people attempting to use hard fp in the kernel
which of course did result in FPR corruption.  Adding -msoft-float made
sure that floating point operations would result in a link error because
the kernel does not supply a soft-fp library.

But maybe there are other methods to achieve the same - such as

#define float diediedie
#define double goboom

  Ralf

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Ralf Baechle wrote:

> > With binutils snapshots since 29.07.2014 I get the following build failure:
> > {standard input}: Warning: .gnu_attribute 4,3 requires `softfloat'
> >   LD      arch/mips/alchemy/common/built-in.o
> > mipsel-softfloat-linux-gnu-ld: Warning: arch/mips/alchemy/common/built-in.o
> >  uses -msoft-float (set by arch/mips/alchemy/common/prom.o),
> >  arch/mips/alchemy/common/sleeper.o uses -mhard-float
> > 
> > Extend cflags with a soft-float directive for the assembler, and add
> > hardfloat directives to assembler files dealing with FPU
> > registers to compensate.
> 
> I had a discussion about this with Maciej.  He suggested that this
> behavious of binutils should be taken a look at but also that we rather
> should remove the -msoft-float option from the kernel and I support his
> view.
> 
> I did add -msoft-float in 6218cf4410cfce7bc7e89834e73525b124625d4c
> [[MIPS] Always pass -msoft-float.] in 2006 because back then there was a
> wave of bug reports from people attempting to use hard fp in the kernel
> which of course did result in FPR corruption.  Adding -msoft-float made
> sure that floating point operations would result in a link error because
> the kernel does not supply a soft-fp library.
> 
> But maybe there are other methods to achieve the same - such as
> 
> #define float diediedie
> #define double goboom

 I had a short discussion with Matthew (cc-ed) meanwhile who has been 
doing binutils and GCC work in this area recently and made GCC pass 
`-msoft-float' down to GAS as a part of floating-point ABI updates being 
made right now.  As a result at this point I think we want to keep 
`-msoft-float', and furthermore the use of `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set 
hardfloat' appears mostly right to me however with the following 
exceptions:

1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are available 
   (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same time) 
   and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build the 
   kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):

#ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
#define SET_HARDFLOAT .set	hardfloat
#else
#define SET_HARDFLOAT
#endif

   Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this 
   feature was only added with:

commit 037b32b9ffec4d7e68c596a0835dee8b0d26818f
Author: Adam Nemet <anemet@caviumnetworks.com>
Date:   Mon Apr 28 17:06:28 2008 +0000

   I'm not convinced that would be very wise, but maybe it's OK after six 
   years after all.

2. Use `.set hardfloat' only around the places that really require it, 
   i.e.:

	.set	push
	SET_HARDFLOAT
# Do the FP stuff.
	.set	pop

   (so the arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S piece is good except for maybe using 
   a macro, depending on the outcome of #1 above, but the other ones are 
   not).

 So the patch looks to me like a good starting point, but it is not quite 
there yet.

 The use of `-Wa,-msoft-float' will also improve our safety checks with 
GCC versions up to 4.9 as it'll catch any unintended use of FP operations 
in assembly code as long as the version of GAS used is at least 2.19.

  Maciej

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Manuel Lauss]

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> wrote:

> 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are available
>    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same time)
>    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build the
>    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
>
> #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
> #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
> #else
> #define SET_HARDFLOAT
> #endif
>
>    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this

Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?


> 2. Use `.set hardfloat' only around the places that really require it,
>    i.e.:
>
>         .set    push
>         SET_HARDFLOAT
> # Do the FP stuff.
>         .set    pop
>
>    (so the arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S piece is good except for maybe using
>    a macro, depending on the outcome of #1 above, but the other ones are
>    not).

I'll update the patch.

Thank you!
        Manuel

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Ralf Baechle]

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 09:29:24PM +0200, Manuel Lauss wrote:

> >    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this
> 
> Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?

The users of very old toolchains mostly fall into two categories:

 - build farms.  All that matters is if the code is building as it probably
   won't ever get to see a CPU from the inside.
 - users running into issues with an old kernel in an otherwise well
   running system.  They will try to use whatever is installed because
   an upgrade can be technically hard - or somebody most likely wearing a
   tie may throw a tantrum at the thought of upgrding.

  Ralf

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Manuel Lauss wrote:

> > 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are available
> >    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same time)
> >    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build the
> >    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
> >
> > #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
> > #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
> > #else
> > #define SET_HARDFLOAT
> > #endif
> >
> >    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this
> 
> Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?

 I don't know, but unless they're toolchain developers at the same time 
I'd expect some to stick with whatever they've found working.  The worst 
thing that can happen to you is when you need to upgrade the kernel to fix 
a critical bug, then the updated kernel requires newer tools and then the 
newer tools trigger a bunch of new bugs that you don't even know if they 
are kernel or toolchain bugs (or both).  So I don't want to force people 
to upgrade unless absolutely necessary (e.g. a microMIPS kernel), I'd 
rather let them do it whenever *they* feel comfortable doing it.

 Linux's generic requirement is binutils 2.12 or newer, I reckon we bumped 
the corresponding requirement for the MIPS port up a bit recently because 
of some braindamage in binutils 2.24 the workaround for which has some 
version limitations.  And I am not convinced it is a good idea to bump the 
requirement in such a short time again just because a GCC version to be 
released next year have become strictier about the FP ABI (that we don't 
use anyway).  Especially as the solution is so simple.

 I'm still at 2.20.1 as far as the MIPS target is concerned BTW, I just 
considered the time I'd have to spend on upgrading would be better spent 
on sorting out the kernel issues I've had outstanding, and there's been 
quite a bunch.

  Maciej

RE: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Matthew Fortune]

Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> writes:
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Manuel Lauss wrote:
> 
> > > 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are
> available
> > >    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same
> time)
> > >    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build
> the
> > >    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
> > >
> > > #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
> > > #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
> > > #else
> > > #define SET_HARDFLOAT
> > > #endif
> > >
> > >    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19;
> this
> >
> > Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?
> 
>  I don't know, but unless they're toolchain developers at the same time
> I'd expect some to stick with whatever they've found working.  The worst
> thing that can happen to you is when you need to upgrade the kernel to
> fix
> a critical bug, then the updated kernel requires newer tools and then
> the
> newer tools trigger a bunch of new bugs that you don't even know if they
> are kernel or toolchain bugs (or both).  So I don't want to force people
> to upgrade unless absolutely necessary (e.g. a microMIPS kernel), I'd
> rather let them do it whenever *they* feel comfortable doing it.

Rather than me give a bunch of comments here could someone confirm what
your (kernel perspective) opinion is of what should change?

From what I can tell it seems OK for pre-existing kernel releases to not
build with new tools from time to time. Also, it seems OK for currently
maintained branches to need a fix as long as it results in code which
can be built with old and new tools. This was my assumption when doing
the binutils work, it is just unfortunate that Manuel found the issue
before the kernel guys at Imagination had got round to discussing this
topic on the kernel list.

As a slight aside. Please do retain -msoft-float on kernel builds it is the
only way to ensure that no floating-point instructions are used even if
you have no 'float' or 'double' types. MIPS GCC relies on a cost model
to avoid floating point registers being used in the absence of floating
point types but this is not a guarantee. I do plan on working on this area
but it is non-trivial to say the least.

Regards,
Matthew

RE: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Matthew Fortune]

Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> writes:
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014, Manuel Lauss wrote:
> 
> > > 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are
> available
> > >    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same
> time)
> > >    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build
> the
> > >    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
> > >
> > > #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
> > > #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
> > > #else
> > > #define SET_HARDFLOAT
> > > #endif
> > >
> > >    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19;
> this
> >
> > Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?
> 
>  I don't know, but unless they're toolchain developers at the same time
> I'd expect some to stick with whatever they've found working.  The worst
> thing that can happen to you is when you need to upgrade the kernel to
> fix
> a critical bug, then the updated kernel requires newer tools and then
> the
> newer tools trigger a bunch of new bugs that you don't even know if they
> are kernel or toolchain bugs (or both).  So I don't want to force people
> to upgrade unless absolutely necessary (e.g. a microMIPS kernel), I'd
> rather let them do it whenever *they* feel comfortable doing it.

Rather than me give a bunch of comments here could someone confirm what
your (kernel perspective) opinion is of what should change?

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Markos Chandras]

On 08/25/2014 08:29 PM, Manuel Lauss wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> wrote:
> 
>> 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are available
>>    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same time)
>>    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build the
>>    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
>>
>> #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
>> #else
>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT
>> #endif
>>
>>    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this
> 
> Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?
> 
> 
>> 2. Use `.set hardfloat' only around the places that really require it,
>>    i.e.:
>>
>>         .set    push
>>         SET_HARDFLOAT
>> # Do the FP stuff.
>>         .set    pop
>>
>>    (so the arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S piece is good except for maybe using
>>    a macro, depending on the outcome of #1 above, but the other ones are
>>    not).
> 
> I'll update the patch.
> 
> Thank you!
>         Manuel
> 
Hi Manual,

Just wanted to ping you about this patch. Do you intend to submit a new
version including all the feedback from Ralf, Maciej and Matthew?

-- 
markos

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Markos Chandras]

On 08/25/2014 08:29 PM, Manuel Lauss wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> wrote:
> 
>> 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are available
>>    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same time)
>>    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build the
>>    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
>>
>> #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
>> #else
>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT
>> #endif
>>
>>    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this
> 
> Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?
> 
> 
>> 2. Use `.set hardfloat' only around the places that really require it,
>>    i.e.:
>>
>>         .set    push
>>         SET_HARDFLOAT
>> # Do the FP stuff.
>>         .set    pop
>>
>>    (so the arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S piece is good except for maybe using
>>    a macro, depending on the outcome of #1 above, but the other ones are
>>    not).
> 
> I'll update the patch.
> 
> Thank you!
>         Manuel
> 
Hi Manual,

Just wanted to ping you about this patch. Do you intend to submit a new
version including all the feedback from Ralf, Maciej and Matthew?

-- 
markos

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/10/2014 03:39 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 08/25/2014 08:29 PM, Manuel Lauss wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> wrote:
>>
>>> 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are available
>>>    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same time)
>>>    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build the
>>>    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
>>>
>>> #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
>>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
>>> #else
>>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT
>>> #endif
>>>
>>>    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this
>>
>> Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?
>>
>>
>>> 2. Use `.set hardfloat' only around the places that really require it,
>>>    i.e.:
>>>
>>>         .set    push
>>>         SET_HARDFLOAT
>>> # Do the FP stuff.
>>>         .set    pop
>>>
>>>    (so the arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S piece is good except for maybe using
>>>    a macro, depending on the outcome of #1 above, but the other ones are
>>>    not).
>>
>> I'll update the patch.
>>
>> Thank you!
>>         Manuel
>>
> Hi Manual,
> 
> Just wanted to ping you about this patch. Do you intend to submit a new
> version including all the feedback from Ralf, Maciej and Matthew?
> 

s/Manual/Manuel/ :)

sorry about that

-- 
markos

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/10/2014 03:39 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 08/25/2014 08:29 PM, Manuel Lauss wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> wrote:
>>
>>> 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are available
>>>    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same time)
>>>    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build the
>>>    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
>>>
>>> #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
>>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
>>> #else
>>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT
>>> #endif
>>>
>>>    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this
>>
>> Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?
>>
>>
>>> 2. Use `.set hardfloat' only around the places that really require it,
>>>    i.e.:
>>>
>>>         .set    push
>>>         SET_HARDFLOAT
>>> # Do the FP stuff.
>>>         .set    pop
>>>
>>>    (so the arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S piece is good except for maybe using
>>>    a macro, depending on the outcome of #1 above, but the other ones are
>>>    not).
>>
>> I'll update the patch.
>>
>> Thank you!
>>         Manuel
>>
> Hi Manual,
> 
> Just wanted to ping you about this patch. Do you intend to submit a new
> version including all the feedback from Ralf, Maciej and Matthew?
> 

s/Manual/Manuel/ :)

sorry about that

-- 
markos

Re: [RFC PATCH V2] MIPS: fix build with binutils 2.24.51+

[Manuel Lauss]

Hi,

I still indend to, I just have a lot of non-linux related things to do
currently.
And I still struggle to get softloat gcc-4.9 and glibc built with
binutils commit
351cdf24d223290b15fa991e5052ec9e9bd1e284 applied, the linker throws float errors
left and right :(

Manuel

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Markos Chandras
<Markos.Chandras@imgtec.com> wrote:
> On 10/10/2014 03:39 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 08/25/2014 08:29 PM, Manuel Lauss wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 1. Determine whether `-Wa,-msoft-float' and `.set hardfloat' are available
>>>>    (a single check will do, they were added to GAS both at the same time)
>>>>    and only enable them if supported by binutils being used to build the
>>>>    kernel, e.g. (for the `.set' part):
>>>>
>>>> #ifdef GAS_HAS_SET_HARDFLOAT
>>>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT .set      hardfloat
>>>> #else
>>>> #define SET_HARDFLOAT
>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>>    Otherwise we'd have to bump the binutils requirement up to 2.19; this
>>>
>>> Do people really update their toolchain so rarely?
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2. Use `.set hardfloat' only around the places that really require it,
>>>>    i.e.:
>>>>
>>>>         .set    push
>>>>         SET_HARDFLOAT
>>>> # Do the FP stuff.
>>>>         .set    pop
>>>>
>>>>    (so the arch/mips/kernel/r4k_fpu.S piece is good except for maybe using
>>>>    a macro, depending on the outcome of #1 above, but the other ones are
>>>>    not).
>>>
>>> I'll update the patch.
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>         Manuel
>>>
>> Hi Manual,
>>
>> Just wanted to ping you about this patch. Do you intend to submit a new
>> version including all the feedback from Ralf, Maciej and Matthew?
>>
>
> s/Manual/Manuel/ :)
>
> sorry about that
>
> --
> markos
>