This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org 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: [RFC][AARCH64][GAS]Stop creating new frag for .inst directive


Hi Renlin,

I don't see any particular reasons why we call frag_align_code here.
If it's indeed have reasons to do so, I would be quite happy if somebody
could explain it to me.

Certainly. It is there in order to ensure 4-byte alignment when generating instructions. Consider this variation of your test case:

        .inst 0x01020304
        nop
        .short 0x1234
        .inst 0x12345678

With your patch applied this generates:

   0:   01020304        .inst   0x01020304 ; undefined
   4:   d503201f        nop
   8:   1234            .short  0x1234
   a:   12345678        and     w24, w19, #0xfffff003

Whereas the current code produces:

   0:   01020304        .inst   0x01020304 ; undefined
   4:   d503201f        nop
   8:   1234            .short  0x1234
   a:   0000            .short  0x0000
   c:   12345678        and     w24, w19, #0xfffff003

Note the two bytes of padding at address 0xa, so that the second .inst pseudo starts on a 4-byte aligned boundary.

Cheers
  Nick

PS. Your test case was missing a 1: label, and the error message needed to be in quotes...


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