Fix tlbsx instruction for PPC440
Kumar Gala
kumar.gala@freescale.com
Mon Sep 27 18:27:00 GMT 2004
On Sep 27, 2004, at 1:18 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 11:52:13AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> >> It seems simplest to me to give this entire instruction family an
> >> optional RT register, and not worry about which instructions are
> >> supported on which subarchitectures - hence PPC403|PPC440|BOOKE.
> >
> > Works for me. The architecture book says that where the result is
> > stored is implementation dependent.
>
> Thanks. Here's a patch against binutils HEAD. I made the tests a bit
> more comprehensive and put them with the other tlbsx tests (hence the
> much longer delta to booke.d). I'm still wondering whether it's
> necessary to say PPC403|PPC440|BOOKE, or whether some subset of that
> would do.
I think you could drop the PPC440 and just make it PPC403|BOOKE.
- kumar
More information about the Binutils
mailing list