[Top] [All Lists]

old binutils-2.13-msp.diff and binutils 2.19

Subject: old binutils-2.13-msp.diff and binutils 2.19
From: Andrew Randrianasulu <>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:55:20 -0800 (PST)
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024;; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=K0xB8DIm4emutc4XoMks6Dw/qf7lz1256Hiz6H+lIDN+MmSHRN5CK51tFgsEXkpyMw4N9s285AblYgqSY+4ONUgjND3slIvXsqDY57p3tO2K4cqQRpAxtJrILhZG07bCNmyIqsId2S6IgXSCoME4EkAF1tXXdzKNw5oTPclLThY=;
Original-recipient: rfc822;
Hello. Sorry for asking this question - but while trying to move forward this 
patch, i faced with duplicated opcode in opcodes/mips-ops.c One "vmulu" was 
defined for Octeon, and one - for SGI O2 VICE coprocessor. After commenting out 
one from Octeon - my [patched] binutils finally was able to pass gcc-3.4.6 
compilation. I saw some duplicates in this file, apart from my case,  but i'm 
really unsure what to do in this case? Move patch parts around? But moving them 
in random order will break assembler, already learned this ....

Also I'm lost in gas/config/tc-mips.c Original patch was designed for (K, m, n) 
[i don't know what they mean .. some form of internal markers?] and i changed 
it for (+K, +m,+n). But i'm really lost in those big switches there. Right now 
my new code disabled, looking at old patch i must add some logic before yet 
another switch. Where is the best place for discussing this - here or on gcc 
mail list?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>