From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Charles Papon <charles.papon.90@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: kbuild: drop CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_C
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 23:59:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190813065905.GA21020@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMabmM+YX3L-J1GCvDaC9H66YMArfs6PuKCsE_dNMBtApOxZig@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 12:18:22AM +0200, Charles Papon wrote:
> > Because it it the unix platform baseline as stated in the patch.
> I know that, but i'm looking for arguments why RVC could't be kept as
> an option, especialy it is only an optimisation option without
> behavioral/code changes.
>
> That baseline make sense for heavy linux distributions, where you
> expect everybody to compile with a baseline set of ISA extentions, to
> make binary exchanges easier.
> But for smaller systems, i do not see advantages having RVC forced.
I don't fully agree with the benefits, but then again how little
impact using the C extension has on the kernel build I'm now convinced
that keeping it should be ok.
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-13 6:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-07 2:30 [PATCH] riscv: kbuild: drop CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_C Paul Walmsley
2019-08-07 6:49 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-07 12:28 ` Bin Meng
2019-08-08 12:18 ` Charles Papon
2019-08-12 15:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-12 19:49 ` Darius Rad
2019-08-12 22:18 ` Charles Papon
2019-08-13 6:59 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-08-31 2:04 ` Paul Walmsley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190813065905.GA21020@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=atish.patra@wdc.com \
--cc=bmeng.cn@gmail.com \
--cc=charles.papon.90@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).