From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:54:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from relay01.mx.bawue.net ([193.7.176.67]:10923 "EHLO relay01.mx.bawue.net") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S23841528AbYKVUyi (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:54:38 +0000 Received: from lagash (X5e0c.x.pppool.de [89.59.94.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay01.mx.bawue.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB48481A8; Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:54:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from ths by lagash with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L3zUw-0003ak-BV; Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:54:34 +0100 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:54:34 +0100 From: Thiemo Seufer To: Andrew Randrianasulu Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: old binutils-2.13-msp.diff and binutils 2.19 Message-ID: <20081122205434.GA17042@networkno.de> References: <922652.90789.qm@web59801.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <922652.90789.qm@web59801.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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: 21394 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: ths@networkno.de Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Andrew Randrianasulu wrote: > Hello. Sorry for asking this question - but while trying to move > forward this patch, i faced with duplicated opcode in > opcodes/mips-ops.c One "vmulu" was defined for Octeon, and one - > for SGI O2 VICE coprocessor. After commenting out one from Octeon > - my [patched] binutils finally was able to pass gcc-3.4.6 compilation. > I saw some duplicates in this file, apart from my case, but i'm > really unsure what to do in this case? Move patch parts around? > But moving them in random order will break assembler, already learned > this .... > > Also I'm lost in gas/config/tc-mips.c Original patch was designed for > (K, m, n) [i don't know what they mean .. some form of internal > markers?] Exactly that, their meaning is documented in include/opcode/mips.h > and i changed it for (+K, +m,+n). But i'm really lost in those big > switches there. Right now my new code disabled, looking at old patch > i must add some logic before yet another switch. Where is the best > place for discussing this - here or on gcc mail list? Use binutils@sourceware.org Thiemo