This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Add missing c.unimp instruction.
- From: Jim Wilson <jimw at sifive dot com>
- To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at sifive dot com>
- Cc: Andrew Waterman <andrew at sifive dot com>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 19:42:56 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Add missing c.unimp instruction.
- References: <CAFyWVaY+cFnE69Bvjzsj=8qvrWSHH0RQPrXGRnWBTQOR+nkYbA@mail.gmail.com> <mhng-fd435db1-b403-4234-aa58-a4ec6def3c83@palmer-si-x1c4>
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 6:44 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com> wrote:
> I agree that auditing the list isn't high priority, but that doesn't mean we
> should skip fixing the bugs that jump out. I can send the patch if you want.
I'm finding your comments hard to parse, as there are too many mistakes here.
I agree that unimp is an alias for csrrw, but I think you are
unnecessarily sacrificing usability if you mark it as an alias.
> >> {"c.ebreak", 0, {"C", 0}, "", MATCH_C_EBREAK, MASK_C_EBREAK, match_opcode, 0 },
> >
> > This one is explicitly listed in the ISA manual as an illegal instruction, so
> > it's correct to not be an alias.
c.ebreak is not an illegal instruction. Maybe you meant c.unimp here?
Jim