Re: ssnop for mips

[cgd at sibyte dot com]

"Ralf Baechle" <ralf@uni-koblenz.de> writes:
> I fear new members and extensions of the MIPS family grow faster than you
> can extend the ABI ...

One would hope that that'll slow down a bit with MIPS32 and MIPS64
being "standard."


> MIPS I - IV, MIPS32 and MIPS64 are well defined instruction sets.  So
> disassembling those always by default should be fine.  ASEs and customer
> specific extensions are a different issue.

Problem is, what about when MIPS I - V, MIPS32, MIPS64 instructions
conflict with specific processors' extensions?

e.g. say a processor provides MIPS I + special-purpose extensions (not
really an odd situation 8-), and some of those extension instructions
conflict with instruction encodings which later become "well-defined."

you compile with -mips1 because that's basically what the processor
is, and that's how the binaries get marked.  but special-purpose
instructions (which conflict) that you've generated using inline
assembly will be incorrectly disassembled.

I still think you've gotta got with what the markings on the binary
say.


Anyway, "i'm done."  8-)


cgd