From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-38156-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 6257 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2005 22:54:30 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 6223 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2005 22:54:26 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO iris1.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de) (129.69.118.2)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 22 Feb 2005 22:54:26 -0000
Received: from rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de ([129.69.118.42])
	by iris1.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de with esmtp
	id 1D3iv8-0007Fz-00; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 23:54:22 +0100
Received: from ica2_ts by rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1D3iv7-0005RA-00; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 23:54:21 +0100
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:57:00 -0000
To: Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>
Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@mips.com>, binutils@sources.redhat.com,
	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS gas/ld test suite portability fixes
Message-ID: <20050222225421.GF7729@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0502221612240.20174@perivale.mips.com> <20050222211319.GC7729@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0502222119110.20174@perivale.mips.com> <20050222220154.GE7729@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <1109110466.5032.25.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1109110466.5032.25.camel@localhost.localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
From: Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>
X-SW-Source: 2005-02/txt/msg00528.txt.bz2

Eric Christopher wrote:
> 
> > I meant something like:
> > 
> > --- tc-mips.c   18 Feb 2005 22:12:50 -0000      1.284
> > +++ tc-mips.c   22 Feb 2005 21:54:59 -0000
> > @@ -10652,7 +10694,11 @@ mips_after_parse_args (void)
> >      }
> > 
> >    if (arch_info == 0)
> > -    arch_info = mips_parse_cpu ("default CPU", MIPS_CPU_STRING_DEFAULT);
> > +    {
> > +      arch_info = mips_parse_cpu ("default CPU", MIPS_CPU_STRING_DEFAULT);
> > +      if (ABI_NEEDS_64BIT_REGS (mips_abi) && !ISA_HAS_64BIT_REGS (arch_info->isa))
> > +       arch_info->isa = ISA_MIPS3;
> > +    }
> > 
> >    if (ABI_NEEDS_64BIT_REGS (mips_abi) && !ISA_HAS_64BIT_REGS (arch_info->isa))
> >      as_bad ("-march=%s is not compatible with the selected ABI",
> > 
> > 
> > (This fails to compile because arch_info is a constant.)
> 
> No, I definitely don't like this. It's going back to the era when
> gcc/gas "guessed" what you meant.

It is not a guess in this case, and gcc uses the from-abi hack to
figure it out correctly. Without it, e.g.

	gcc -mabi=64

would behave differently depending on its configuration. That's surely
counterintuitive and adds e.g. more breakage potential to Makefile
portability.

> If we're passing an abi and don't have
> a required minimum ISA either passed or by default then we should error
> out.

I agree it makes the ABI/ISA/ARCH/TUNE handling even more difficult,
but I think it's worth to also handle this transparently in the
assembler.


Thiemo