From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27693 invoked by alias); 21 Sep 2006 03:34:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 27626 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Sep 2006 03:34:02 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) (64.233.182.186) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2006 03:34:00 +0000 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k26so767448nfc for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:33:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.19.18 with SMTP id w18mr111483nfi; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:33:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.28.17 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 20:33:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <246188420609202033q5ff9aa9bi281577f841620c51@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 05:31:00 -0000 From: "Bridge Wu" To: "Joseph S. Myers" Subject: Re: iwmmxt2 patch for binutils-2.16.92 Cc: binutils In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <246188420609190438l5846aaf2j39ebda2d989108fe@mail.gmail.com> <246188420609191945h3c0c0a90pee6d5d5f972674fd@mail.gmail.com> Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-09/txt/msg00216.txt.bz2 The correct disassembly result should be as below. bit 21 (write_back) should be set, otherwise, it will be illegal instruction. 0: ecb11000 wldrb wr1, [r1] 14: ecf11000 wldrh wr1, [r1] 50: eca11000 wstrb wr1, [r1] 54: ece11000 wstrh wr1, [r1] This does exists in iWMMXt1 instruction, not introduced by iWMMXt2 patch. I made a mistake due to I noticed it on iWMMXt2 spec. I will submit a patch to current binutils separately. -- best regards, -Bridge On 9/20/06, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > You do not say what you expect these instructions to assemble to, and your > patch does not apply cleanly to current binutils CVS mainline so I cannot > tell what they assemble to with your patch. They are valid iWMMXt1 > instructions without needing an iWMMXt2 patch; with my patch, and with > unpatched mainline, they assemble to > > 00000000 <.text> ec911000 wldrb wr1, [r1] > 00000004 <.text+0x4> ecd11000 wldrh wr1, [r1] > 00000008 <.text+0x8> ec811000 wstrb wr1, [r1] > 0000000c <.text+0xc> ecc11000 wstrh wr1, [r1] > > If there is a bug here, it would not seem to be one in my patch, since the > results are the same as without the patch. As such I hope this bug can be > considered separately from my patch; you can enter a report in binutils > Bugzilla, or submit a patch against current binutils mainline (currently > 2.17.50 20060920) that fixes this bug (only) and includes testcases for > the assembler testsuite. > > -- > Joseph S. Myers > joseph@codesourcery.com >