MIPS assembler branch relaxations

Alexandre Oliva aoliva@redhat.com
Sun Sep 15 03:38:00 GMT 2002


On Sep 15, 2002, Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Sep 14, 2002, Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> wrote:
>> 
>> >> Why beqzl?  Admittedly, I don't know much about MIPS hardware, but I'd
>> >> think that just "b" would probably be faster, since that's the normal
>> >> unconditional branch.
>> 
>> > "b" isn't a valid opcode. :-)
>> 
>> Right.  `b foo' is just a shorthand for `beq $0, $0, foo'
>> 
>> > Btw, "beqzl" also isn't one.
>> 
>> Huh?  Please check your ISA manual again.  It surely is there.

> Definitly not for MIPS IV and earlier.

Eeek!  I apologize.  You're of course right.  I don't know where I got
this idea that beqzl existed but beql did not.  I even wrote about
beql myself, but apparently I did so in DMA mode :-)

> Ok, then it would be "beql".

Agreed, patch adjusted.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer



More information about the Binutils mailing list