* Re: MIPS: IP22: Fix binutils due to binutils 2.25 uselessnes.
2016-12-16 2:22 ` MIPS: IP22: Fix binutils due to binutils 2.25 uselessnes Maciej W. Rozycki
@ 2016-12-16 2:22 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2016-12-16 2:52 ` Ralf Baechle
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Maciej W. Rozycki @ 2016-12-16 2:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ralf Baechle; +Cc: linux-mips
On Thu, 15 Dec 2016, linux-mips@linux-mips.org wrote:
> Fix build with binutils 2.25 by open coding the offending
>
> dli $1, 0x9000000080000000
>
> as
>
> li $1, 0x9000
> dsll $1, $1, 48
>
> which is ugly be the only thing that will build on all binutils vintages.
What about bit #31? Shouldn't this be say:
lui $1, 0x9000
dsll $1, $1, 16
ori $1, $1, 0x8000
dsll $1, $1, 16
?
Maciej
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: MIPS: IP22: Fix binutils due to binutils 2.25 uselessnes.
2016-12-16 2:22 ` MIPS: IP22: Fix binutils due to binutils 2.25 uselessnes Maciej W. Rozycki
2016-12-16 2:22 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
@ 2016-12-16 2:52 ` Ralf Baechle
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ralf Baechle @ 2016-12-16 2:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Maciej W. Rozycki; +Cc: linux-mips
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 02:22:16AM +0000, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2016, linux-mips@linux-mips.org wrote:
>
> > Fix build with binutils 2.25 by open coding the offending
> >
> > dli $1, 0x9000000080000000
> >
> > as
> >
> > li $1, 0x9000
> > dsll $1, $1, 48
> >
> > which is ugly be the only thing that will build on all binutils vintages.
>
> What about bit #31? Shouldn't this be say:
>
> lui $1, 0x9000
> dsll $1, $1, 16
> ori $1, $1, 0x8000
> dsll $1, $1, 16
>
> ?
Argh, didn't spot the `8' in there. 64 bit constants are way too long :)
Thanks for reporting, will fix.
Ralf
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread