From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com>
Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>, libc-ports@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH roland/arm-unified] ARM: Convert string/ assembly to unified syntax.
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:19:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <513E4A5E.6020404@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130311182236.CAA382C071@topped-with-meat.com>
On 03/11/2013 02:22 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> The assemblers I'm using give warnings about some code being in the older
> syntax. This makes them happy. Verified that the assembled instructions
> are unchanged.
>
> OK?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Roland
>
>
> ports/ChangeLog.arm
> * sysdeps/arm/memcpy.S: Convert to unified assembly syntax.
> * sysdeps/arm/memmove.S: Likewise.
> * sysdeps/arm/memset.S: Likewise.
> * sysdeps/arm/strlen.S: Likewise.
>
> --- a/ports/sysdeps/arm/memcpy.S
> +++ b/ports/sysdeps/arm/memcpy.S
> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@
> #endif
>
> .text
> + .syntax unified
All new code should really be using the unified syntax, I'm happy
to see this change, and a quick check against my quick reference
for unified syntax passes OK.
When you verified the assembled instructions were unchanged did
you look to see that the opcodes were the same or that disassembling
the result yielded the same previously disassembled instructions?
I say this just to make sure we didn't happen across any binutils
bugs, which isn't uncommon in some of the less used encodings, or
that the encodings changed and that they mean something else now.
Cheers,
Carlos.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-11 21:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-11 18:22 Roland McGrath
2013-03-11 21:19 ` Carlos O'Donell [this message]
2013-03-11 21:25 ` Roland McGrath
2013-03-11 23:35 ` Joseph S. Myers
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=513E4A5E.6020404@redhat.com \
--to=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=libc-ports@sourceware.org \
--cc=roland@hack.frob.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).