This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: add vulcan support to gas
- From: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" <Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com>
- To: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, Virendra Pathak <virendra dot pathak at broadcom dot com>, Marcus Shawcroft <marcus dot shawcroft at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Syed Faisal Akber <faisal at akber dot net>, "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>, Virendra Kumar Pathak <kumarvir dot pathak at gmail dot com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 11:23:15 +0100
- Subject: Re: add vulcan support to gas
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CANx+fTAsJtE27XTwVV8Cx9mZT4Nwn4eotTRNB1wf3yU0xqR5Mw@mail.gmail.com> <email@example.com> <CAFqB+PzaheoB1UoHhT_1he7BrUXYFsoHHTtb7B3=ibWeK4kd4w@mail.gmail.com> <CANx+fTAZ2KfMO5JkMhUDjcMyY1190mW4PtBySggUO9XN_9AzGQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAFqB+Pw4V+Ho92qr5+2J3CG=Fd15u90-bM0tJp3yG4ytUuAeNg@mail.gmail.com> <CANx+fTCec7QD47iPW6T=R3Qz15zNy9tasVnTo1m81GXuQM+K+A@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 13/06/16 14:20, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Yes. Assembly level programmers may wish to generate their own gas command
> lines. Plus it is entirely possible that one day gcc might pass the -mcpu
> option on to gas.
Unlikely. It would put too onerous a restriction on having the latest
version of GAS installed. If the compiler needs to support a new
instruction, then obviously GAS has to know how to handle it, but GAS
shouldn't have to know about every CPU that's available for each
architecture in order for the compiler to support them.
That doesn't mean that GAS can't recognize CPU names, just that the
compiler should avoid such a feature.