This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: PATCH: Add access restriction check for application registers(was Re: Is this a gas bug?)

From: Jie Zhang <jiez at citiz dot net>
To: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, george dot gan at intel dot com, "binutils at sources dot redhat dot com" <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>, "bug-binutils at gnu dot org" <bug-binutils at gnu dot org>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 21:44:09 +0800
Subject: Re: PATCH: Add access restriction check for application registers(was Re: Is this a gas bug?)
References: <1085333524.2233.56.camel@mars> <jesmdrow2p.fsf@sykes.suse.de> <1085411758.869.20.camel@mars> <20040526182849.GA1631@lucon.org>

On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 02:28, H. J. Lu wrote:
> 
> The patch is not corrrect. I am testing this patch now.
> 

Yes, I agree. But then why not define ar_is_in_integer_unit (int reg) as
following now: 

static int
ar_is_in_integer_unit (int reg)
{
  reg -= REG_AR;
  return reg >= 48 && reg <= 127;
}


Jie

Follow-Ups:
- Re: PATCH: Add access restriction check for application registers (was Re: Is this a gas bug?)
  - From: H. J. Lu

References:
- RE: Is this a gas bug?
  - From: Jie Zhang
- Re: Is this a gas bug?
  - From: Andreas Schwab
- PATCH: Add access restriction check for application registers (wasRe: Is this a gas bug?)
  - From: Jie Zhang
- Re: PATCH: Add access restriction check for application registers (was Re: Is this a gas bug?)
  - From: H. J. Lu

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]