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