On 5/24/10, Mark Mitchell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Certainly removing support for FPA (and any targets that require it) as
> > a first step would be an option; but we should also focus on where we
> > want to get to.
>
> I agree with that. But, it would also be interesting to know just how
> broken that code is. If, in fact, FPA and/or ARM ELF mostly work at
> present, then there's less call for actually removing (as opposed to
> deprecating) things.
FPA code generation is 100% good AFAIK, and has been used intensively
for years (as the FPU model for all gnu/linux ports before EABI).
Maverick is the one that has never worked since it was submitted; I
have patches that make it 100% good (well, ok, no known failure cases)
but don't know how to get them into mainline.
M
