Re: [PATCH] Typo in tc-arm.c

[Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>]

> On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 04:54, Paul Brook wrote:
> > Patch below fixes typo in do_umaal.
> > 
> > Looks obviously correct, but I need someone else to apply.
> 
> Paul --
> 
> Two thoughts:
> 
> (a) you should probably request CVS write-after-approval access to
> binutils,
> 

I agree (FWIW).

> (b) since we clearly fail to have sufficiently many test cases for 
> umaal, would you please add one?
> 


Yep.  The way I've been trying to add test cases is along the following 
lines.

For each instruction there should be a test that checks the basic bit 
pattern (by using r0 in every register position):

	umaal	r0, r0, r0, r0

A test for each register position, ideally with r15 (to check that the 
correct bits are being set.

	umaal	r0, r0, r0, r15
	umaal	r0, r0, r15, r0
	umaal	r0, r15, r0, r0
	umaal	r15, r0, r0, r0

and a final test that checks the conditional operation (if any) and a 
random set of registers.

	umaaleq	r1, r8, r7, r6

Now it is possible that some instructions have restrictions on what 
registers can be used in which arguments (and don't allow duplicates).  So 
some of the rules have to be bent slightly.  Registers r9, r11, and r13 
are reasonable substitutes for r15 in most circumstances (top and bottom 
bit set).

R.