Re: [linuxsh-dev] Re: FPU in kernel (SH-4)

[Greg B. <gb...@po...>]

NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
> 
> Greg Banks wrote:
>  >   So I'm very confused.  Niibe-san, does your gcc behave differently to mine?
> 
> Mine works exactly as yours.  But the original GCC does not.  And it
> seems that it is my misunderstanding that -m4-nofpu is the one for our
> demands (SH-4 with no FPU division).  At that time -m4-nofpu was
> introduced, because we really wanted such a option, we're just hurry
> to adopt this option (assuming this *is* for us), changing CPP macro.

  Aha, now I understand.

> Now, I think that it's not.  I think what we should use is -m4 and
> say, -fno-fpudiv or -fidiv.  The option -m4-nofpu would be the option
> for some custom model, variant of SH, perhaps.

  Ok.  Fair enough.

> BTW, thanks for the logos.  It looks pretty good.

  Do you want me to check in the header file?

Greg.
-- 
If it's a choice between being a paranoid, hyper-suspicious global
village idiot, or a gullible, mega-trusting sheep, I don't look
good in mint sauce.                      - jd, slashdot, 11Feb2000.