[PATCH v3 0/3] RISC-V: Add ratified 'E' base ISA support with draft ABIs

[Tsukasa OI]

Committed PATCH 1-2/3 because as far as I could test, there's no problem
even on the GDB side (except obviously, GDB cannot support RV64E ELF files).

Due to my tendonitis, I could not type much for recent few weeks.

Since it got much better (not complete recovery though), I should commit
the approved part before I forget (or tendonitis gets any worse).

Thanks,
Tsukasa

On 2023/09/25 17:04, Tsukasa OI wrote:
> On 2023/09/25 12:07, Nelson Chu wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 5:08 PM Tsukasa OI <research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com
>> <mailto:research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     PATCH v1 (only Binutils):
>>     <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-July/128583.html
>>     <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-July/128583.html>>
>>     PATCH v2 (Binutils+GDB):
>>     <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-August/129314.html
>>     <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-August/129314.html>>
>>
>>     Changes: v1 -> v2
>>     -   Added GDB support
>>
>>     Changes: v2 -> v3
>>     -   Rebased against the latest master
>>         (PATCH 1/3 related merge conflict is now resolved)
>>
>>
>>     Related Project:
>>         PATCH 1/3: Binutils
>>         PATCH 2/3: Binutils
>>
>>
>> Looks good to me :-)
>>  
>>
>>         PATCH 3/3: GDB
>>
>>
>> I cannot approve anything about gdb, so this will need gdb experts to help.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Nelson
>>  
> 
> Thanks, I understand that you cannot approve GDB part so it's okay.
> 
> I'll commit if GDB part is also approved or I confirm that not applying
> PATCH 3/3 does not cause unnecessary effects to Binutils and GDB (in
> this case, I'll commit only PATCH 1-2/3).
> 
> Tsukasa