This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] Add MIPS ufr macro instruction
- From: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
- To: Andrew Bennett <Andrew dot Bennett at imgtec dot com>
- Cc: "binutils\ at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 13:21:40 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add MIPS ufr macro instruction
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <0DA23CC379F5F945ACB41CF394B982774C835E at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <87vc01erxi dot fsf at talisman dot default> <87siuzcpp4 dot fsf at talisman dot default> <0DA23CC379F5F945ACB41CF394B982774CB15B at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <0DA23CC379F5F945ACB41CF394B982774CE268 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org>
Andrew Bennett <Andrew.Bennett@imgtec.com> writes:
>>> Seems like this might have hit a log-jam, so just in case, what I really
>>> meant was: please answer David's question first.
>> Hi Richard,
>> Sorry for the delay in the replying I have been thinking about David's
>> David, I agree with you, having ufr as an actual instruction, rather
>> than a macro
>> would make it much clearer to see it's use when disassembling a program.
>> I am currently changing the patch to reflect these changes, and will
>> post it back
>> in the next few days.
> The updated patch and ChangeLog entry is below.
Sorry to mess you around, but I thought David was objecting more to the
macro existing at all. I could be wrong though.
The problem with using ufr for disassembly is that AFAICT it isn't
mentioned in the manuals. People disassembling pass-me-downs might
struggle to know what it means. Maybe the ideal would be to disassemble
the CTC1 normally and add a comment "; ufr " next to it. But that's
So TBH I preferred your original patch.
There haven't been any more objections, so if you're still OK with the
original version, I suggest we go with that. I can apply it for you if so.