[PATCH v2 1/1] objdump, as: Add callx support for BPF CPU v1

[Jose E. Marchesi]

> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 11:14 AM Jose E. Marchesi
> <jose.marchesi@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 5:58 AM Jose E. Marchesi
>> > <jose.marchesi@oracle.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > First, as I said yesterday in my direct message to you, thank you for
>> >> > making binutils such a pleasant place to contribute to FOSS. You have
>> >> > no idea what that means to contributors like me!
>> >> >
>> >> > Second, thank you for this helpful critique. I really appreciated
>> >> > reading your feedback and will reply inline below (including with an
>> >> > offer for a patch unrelated to callx that may clean up some of the
>> >> > non-constant uses throughout the bpf-specific code).
>> >> >
>> >> > Third, there is good news: The heavy lifting of this patch is largely
>> >> > "overcome by events" -- clang/llvm developers are changing their
>> >> > encoding of the callx instruction to more closely match what gcc does.
>> >> > In fact, v3 of this patch will look much more like v1 than v2.
>> >>
>> >> Hi Will.
>> >>
>> >> It seems to me that all we need binutils-wise is to enable the callx
>> >> instruction with BPF >= v1.  No other changes are necessary as far as I
>> >> can see, other than adjusting the testsuite accordingly.
>> >
>> > It should be making its way across the Internet to you now!
>>
>> Thanks :)
>>
>> > The only thing ... it will probably cause a build error until a
>> > corresponding patch in the simulator lands that takes into
>> > consideration the new enum value.
>> >
>> > I am happy to handle that however you like!
>>
>> No problem.  I will tackle the simulator patch in the GDB list and apply
>> both at almost the same time so the buildbots do not get (too) upset.
>
> Thanks!! It's been fun working on this. And, as I offered to Nick last
> night, I am more than happy to take on a little project to do a
> cleanup of the code. Just let me know if you would be open to that!

By all means, and than you.
Improvements are always very welcome :)

BTW, I would ask you to not include a separated cover letter for single
patches.  This makes it easier to reply and quote to both the
description of the patch and its contents.

>
> Will
>
>>
>> > Sorry for the delay!
>> > Will
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Thanks!