From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Ungerer Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] arch/m68k/lib/mulsi3.S: Optimize] Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 11:07:52 +1000 Message-ID: <573528E8.8070301@westnet.com.au> References: <20160512205217.19233.qmail@ns.horizon.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160512205217.19233.qmail@ns.horizon.com> Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: George Spelvin , geert@linux-m68k.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org On 13/05/16 06:52, George Spelvin wrote: > Thank you very much! > > Greg Ungerer wrote: >> This syntax fails for me (using a binutils-2.25.1 based toolchain). >> Registers must be prefixed with a "%", so here %sp and %a0. >> >> arch/m68k/lib/mulsi3.S: Assembler messages: >> arch/m68k/lib/mulsi3.S:12: Error: syntax error -- statement `lea 4(sp),a0' ignored >> >> That was compiling with just this one patch for a ColdFire target. > > Well, *that* is an embarrassing oversight. If you fix that obvious typo > (I used ":%s/[ad][01]/%&/g"), do you have a way of testing it? > > Setting up a suitable Qemu environment is many times the effort needed > to write the code, so I was hoping someone with the facilities already > in place would be willing to test. > > I've stared at the code and am convinced it's right, but I remember > Knuth's words: "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it > correct, not tried it." I have many test setups for ColdFire (qemu and real hardware) but none of them actually use the mulsi3 code. I don't have anything for testing classic m68000 builds. So other than compiling it I don't have an easy way to currently test it. Regards Greg