[U-Boot-Users] PPC970FX 64-bit processor

[John W. Linville]

> John W. Linville wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 05:53:11PM +0200, tzachi perelstein wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I can be even more explicitly and suggest [.8, .16, .32, .64].
> >>What do you think?  
> >
> >
> >I think I like that even better.

On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 05:09:59PM -0600, Tolunay Orkun wrote:
> It would break compatibility with existing scripts and documentation of 
> everyone else. I think we should maintain earlier definitions at least 
> for existing 32-bit implementations.

Perhaps...if that is the prevailing logic, then I think my original
proposal (just adding a .ll) makes the most sense.

Still, I think the bit-width based modifiers is the cleaner solution.

Tzachi, perhaps you can #ifdef the cli code to only use the [.8, ...,
.64] for new and/or 64-bit platforms?

Just a thought...

John
-- 
John W. Linville
linville at tuxdriver.com