From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Nelson Chu <nelson@rivosinc.com>
Cc: Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
Andrew Waterman <andrew@sifive.com>,
Jim Wilson <jim.wilson.gcc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: adjust logic to avoid register name symbols
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 09:03:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bcf87e1b-a1df-0552-f91a-5c496a656ef1@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPpQWtBvvC8nm7bS8jYUmPH6mNgv9EyQMLdjYSG9pTiL=ZLXjw@mail.gmail.com>
On 15.02.2023 04:09, Nelson Chu wrote:
> Though the logic becomes kind of complicated to me, you are more
> familiar with other targets than me, so maybe this is the right way to
> do it. Basically, the logic looks correct and fine to me, but I still
> need to run regressions in case of an accident. Just make sure that -
> 1. The deferred_sym_rootP are the symbols that have the same names as
> GPR (or FPR, VPR in the future maybe), but we still need to add them
> into the symbol table?
Yes, with "may" inserted ahead of "need". We only need to if the probing
actually succeeds.
> 2. Even if the expression has the same name as GPR, only
> my_getSmallExpression is possible to set exp to O_register, but
> my_getExpression won't have, so the probing_insn_operands is used to
> distinguish between them?
Yes, albeit I find this distinction between the two functions suspicious
(and as said in a post-commit-message remark I'm also having trouble
spotting a pattern of when which of the two functions is [to be] used).
But I didn't want to affect existing behavior too much; iirc there was
at least one testcase which would break otherwise. As said elsewhere -
as a first step towards further improvements it would need settling on
what the intended behavior in various cases actually ought to be.
As to the role of probing_insn_operands: Its two possible non-zero
values distinguish these two cases; zero vs non-zero distinguish whether
we deal with insn operands vs directive (or alike) ones.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-15 8:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-13 8:01 [PATCH 0/2] RISC-V/gas: re-work register named symbols avoidance logic Jan Beulich
2023-02-13 8:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] RISC-V: test for expected / no unexpected symbols Jan Beulich
2023-02-13 8:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: adjust logic to avoid register name symbols Jan Beulich
2023-02-15 3:09 ` Nelson Chu
2023-02-15 8:03 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2023-02-15 8:48 ` Nelson Chu
2023-02-15 9:21 ` Jan Beulich
2023-02-16 9:36 ` Nelson Chu
2023-02-16 16:49 ` Jan Beulich
2023-02-16 16:54 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-03-03 13:52 ` Jan Beulich
2023-03-15 10:07 ` Nelson Chu
2023-03-15 11:49 ` Jan Beulich
2023-03-16 0:30 ` Nelson Chu
2023-04-19 9:37 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bcf87e1b-a1df-0552-f91a-5c496a656ef1@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew@sifive.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=jim.wilson.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=nelson@rivosinc.com \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).