From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Thu, 20 Jun 2013 17:41:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:56274 "EHLO localhost.localdomain" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S6823049Ab3FTPk7gdQHJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jun 2013 17:40:59 +0200 Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 16:40:59 +0100 (BST) From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Ralf Baechle cc: Jayachandran C , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH UPDATED 4/4] MIPS: Move definition of SMP processor id register to header file In-Reply-To: <20130620144821.GB30061@linux-mips.org> Message-ID: References: <1370965298-29210-4-git-send-email-jchandra@broadcom.com> <1371559516-4862-1-git-send-email-jchandra@broadcom.com> <1371559516-4862-2-git-send-email-jchandra@broadcom.com> <20130620144821.GB30061@linux-mips.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.03 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 37063 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: macro@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Ralf Baechle wrote: > So I've removed it again for now. > > Maciej, I wonder why does gas in MIPS III/IV mode accept > > dmfc0 $reg1, $cp0reg > > but not > > dmfc0 $reg1, $cp0reg, 0 > > The generated code is the same after all. Same for MIPS I/II mode and > mfc0. The operand and instruction field was only added to these instructions with the MIPS64 ISA (MIPS32 ISA for MFC0/MTC0). Previously processors did not decode this field and consequently the assembler notation only supports two operands. Since AFAICT the offending pieces are macros I suggest simply dumping the redundant ", 0" part, the two-argument form is as you've observed equivalent. Maciej