From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28418 invoked by alias); 25 Jun 2002 03:48:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cgen-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cgen-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 27794 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2002 03:47:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO touchme.toronto.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Jun 2002 03:47:47 -0000 Received: from tooth.toronto.redhat.com (unknown [172.16.14.29]) by touchme.toronto.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F92EB8049; Mon, 24 Jun 2002 23:47:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from fche@localhost) by tooth.toronto.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g5P3lkP01647; Mon, 24 Jun 2002 23:47:46 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 20:48:00 -0000 From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" To: Hans-Peter Nilsson Cc: cgen@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA:] Fix for lsb0? in -gen-extract-word, take 2. Message-ID: <20020624234746.A1432@redhat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from hp@bitrange.com on Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 09:50:00PM -0400 X-SW-Source: 2002-q2/txt/msg00044.txt.bz2 Hi - On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 09:50:00PM -0400, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > Here's a less intrusive fix since I couldn't wrap my head around > what adjustment there should be for the "<<" expression. I > can't figure out whether it actually has lsb0?-issues at all, so > I'll not touch it. Again, only tested on the CRIS (wip) target. > [...] Let me voice one note of caution regarding this area. cgen is not fully developed with respect to variable-length instruction sets, and some other odd cgen-isa parametrizations. This has been making it necessary to use lsb0=#f for several cpu ports. I'm worried that modification of something as low-level as gen-extract-* can easily break these unusual ports. Unfortunately, only "medium-weird" ports are on the sourceware cgen repository, so it's possible that a change will break only a port you don't (yet) have access to. Anyway, please keep in mind that you're treading on fragile territory. - FChE