[committed] RISC-V: Make g imply zmmul extension.

[Nelson Chu]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:34 AM Jeff Law via Binutils
<binutils@sourceware.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 9/15/22 19:39, Nelson Chu wrote:
> > bfd/
> >       * elfxx-riscv.c (riscv_implicit_subset): Moved entry of m after g,
> >       so that g can imply zmmul.
> > gas/
> >       * testsuite/gas/riscv/attribute-01.d: Updated.
> >       * testsuite/gas/riscv/attribute-02.d: Likewise.
> >       * testsuite/gas/riscv/attribute-03.d: Likewise.
> >       * testsuite/gas/riscv/attribute-04.d: Likewise.
> >       * testsuite/gas/riscv/attribute-05.d: Likewise.
> >       * testsuite/gas/riscv/attribute-10.d: Likewise.
> >       * testsuite/gas/riscv/march-imply-g.d: Likewise.
> >       * testsuite/gas/riscv/march-imply-unsupported.d: Likewise.
>
> Does this happen to fix this kind of failure that started showing up a
> week or two ago?
>
> /tmp/ccdAErP7.s:6522: Error: unrecognized opcode `mul a5,a4,a5',
> extension `m' or `zmmul' required

I get the same error message if I just assemble files with
-march=rv32/64g, or just use the default rv64g arch setting.  I
remember gcc should always pass the expanded imafd for g to assembler,
so the errors won't happen.  This error should only happen when we set
g for architecture string.  Hope the patch can fix the problem you
mentioned, it seems like the same as what I meet.

> I started chasing it down and concluded it likely wasn't the compiler,
> but couldn't take it further before covid knocked me out.  I'm just
> starting to try and catch up on things today...
>

Glad to hear you recovered :)

Nelson

>
> jeff
>