This is the mail archive of the 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] A few ppc assembler fixes

On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 12:44 +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> If I'm not mistaken the dcbt/dcbtst change will affect the following
> -m options.
>  -m601		+server
>  -mppc		+server
>  -mppc32	+server
>  -m603		+server
>  -m604		+server

Yes, although these old cpus only ever used the two operand

>  -m403		+server
>  -m405		+server

My bad, I thought these were caught with the BOOKE usage.
I'll have to move these back to the embedded side.

>  -m7400		+server
>  -m7410		+server
>  -m7450		+server
>  -m7455		+server

These only use the two operand version of the instruction, so are
probably a don't care.  However, I should probably move these
back to the embedded side too.

>  -m750cl	+server

This also only uses the two operand version of the instruction,
but since this is an IBM part, it's probably safest to use the
server ordering.

>  -mppc64	+server
>  -m620		+server
>  -mppc64bridge	+server

Yes, I think we want server ordering here too.

>  -me300		+server

Another case I thought BOOKE would catch, but didn't.  I'll change it.

>  -me5500	-server
>  -me6500	-server

These are embedded processors, and they use the three operand
version of the instruction and expect the embedded ordering,
so yes, these are correct.

>  -mspe		+server

This is more an instruction category rather than a cpu, isn't it?
That said, it's probably safest to lump this in with the embedded
cpus, since that's where it seems to be used.  Do you agree?


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