Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Message-ID: <8b23cec8b7b490ec8ef578cbd2fe4316288d4e13.camel@buserror.net>
From:   Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net>
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Cc:     christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, segher@kernel.crashing.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ndesaulniers@google.com,
        natechancellor@gmail.com
Date:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:26:40 -0600
In-Reply-To: <20201116120913.165317-1-mpe@ellerman.id.au>
References: <20201116120913.165317-1-mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Organization: Red Hat
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Drop -me200 addition to build flags
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2020-11-16 at 23:09 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Currently a build with CONFIG_E200=y will fail with:
> 
>   Error: invalid switch -me200
>   Error: unrecognized option -me200
> 
> Upstream binutils has never supported an -me200 option. Presumably it
> was supported at some point by either a fork or Freescale internal
> binutils.
> 
> We can't support code that we can't even build test, so drop the
> addition of -me200 to the build flags, so we can at least build with
> CONFIG_E200=y.
> 
> Reported-by: Németh Márton <nm127@freemail.hu>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
> ---
> 
> More discussion: 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202011131146.g8dPLQDD-lkp@intel.com
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/Makefile | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

Acked-by: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net>

I'd go further and remove E200 code entirely, unless someone with the hardware
can claim that it actually works.  There doesn't appear to be any actual
platform support for an e200-based system.  It seems to be a long-abandoned
work in progress.

-Scott