Re: [rfa/mips] Second go at vr5500 hilo hazard fix

[Richard Sandiford <rsandifo@redhat.com>]

After leaving a bit of breathing room in case cgd or anyone else
wanted to object...

Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org> writes:
>> cgd@broadcom.com writes:
>>>> Now that the mips sim 'multi' bits are in place (including good
>>>> default), and we have MIPS_MACH(SD) (thanks! 8-), it should be
>>>> possible to code a simple macro which checks for the appropriate bfd
>>>> machine, and decides whether interlocks are present.
>> Well, I had a similar check in:
>>     http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-11/msg00642.html
>> OK, so it wasn't wrapped up in a nice macro, it just checked the
>> architecture directly:
>> +   /* There are no timing requirements in vr5500 code.  */
>> +   if (MIPS_MACH (SD) == bfd_mach_mips5500)
>> +     return 1;
>> But that was exactly what Andrew objected to:
>>     http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-11/msg00668.html
>
> FYI, I think the comment still stands - I'm describing how IGEN is ment
> to be used (and is what Richard's patch does).
>
> (Richard thanks for pokeing at this),
> Andrew

Does this mean that the patch is approved?

Richard