<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Oops, I neglected to reply-all….<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The current stable branch at github still has it:<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="https://github.com/apple/swift-llvm/blob/stable/include/llvm/Support/ARMTargetParser.def#L106" class="">https://github.com/apple/swift-llvm/blob/stable/include/llvm/Support/ARMTargetParser.def#L106</a></div></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Should I get the head of the non-swift repository and generate a new diff?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Also, I suspect that it’s not a good idea to have armv6l map to armv6k, because that seems like quite an assumption to make. Clearly, armv6 sub architectures that aren’t v6k will still be v6l in linux. (provided they’re little-endian).</div><div class="">I’ve already made that change, and it would be included in any revised diff that I send out.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks,</div><div class="">- Will</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jan 6, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Artyom Skrobov <<a href="mailto:Artyom.Skrobov@arm.com" class="">Artyom.Skrobov@arm.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="">William, what revision of LLVM is your patch based on?<br class=""><br class="">The trunk hasn't had ARM_ARCH("armv6hl") since r252903 (Nov 12th)<br class=""><br class=""><br class="">-----Original Message-----<br class="">From: William Dillon [<a href="mailto:william@housedillon.com" class="">mailto:william@housedillon.com</a>] <br class="">Sent: 06 January 2016 17:55<br class="">To: Renato Golin<br class="">Cc: Tim Northover; LLVM Dev; nd; Artyom Skrobov; Daniel Sanders; Eric Christopher<br class="">Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Diff to add ARMv6L to Target parser<br class=""><br class="">Taking the suggestions of the group under consideration, I’ve generated a new diff. The thing to note is that armv6l is now treated identically to armv6hl. I’ve also added a unit test.<br class="">This seems to me to be the least invasive method, and holds to existing conventions as closely as possible.<br class=""><br class="">Thoughts?<br class=""><br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>