This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: MN10300 gas: reject invalid uses of `epsw'
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, echristo at redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 14:49:16 -0500
- Subject: Re: MN10300 gas: reject invalid uses of `epsw'
- References: <orheookmp7.fsf@free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 02:28:04PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> When assembling for the original mn10300/AM30, we accept `epsw' as a
> symbol name. On AM33, `epsw' became a register name, that can be
> copied only to data registers with `mov epsw, d[0-3]'. We currently
> accept silently instructions such as `mov epsw, a[0-3]' and encode
> `epsw' as a symbol name.
>
> I'm pretty sure we should treat epsw as a register name whenever we
> encounter it on AM33, but I'm not sure what to do about epsw and pc
> when we encounter them while assembling for the AM30. It seems to me
> that they should be regarded as symbol names, since code written
> originally for the AM30 could not have known that these names were
> going to be reserved, and might well have used them. On the other
> hand, when porting code from AM30 to AM33, it might be nice to have
> uses of register names available on AM33 as errors, so I'm confused as
> to what would be best to do.
>
> Comments? Ok to install? Ok for the 2.12 branch?
OK for branch once it's committed to trunk, yes.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer