bug-binutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Bug gas/18401] MIPS -march=xlp results in inconsistent ISA markers


From: matthew.fortune at imgtec dot com
Subject: [Bug gas/18401] MIPS -march=xlp results in inconsistent ISA markers
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 22:42:31 +0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18401

Matthew Fortune <matthew.fortune at imgtec dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Attachment #8311|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #5 from Matthew Fortune <matthew.fortune at imgtec dot com> ---
Created attachment 8550
  --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8550&action=edit
Initial proposed fix

This patch is at least the start of a fix for this issue. The problem with the
XLP is that it is described as an 'XLR' in the e_flags machine info which is a
MIPS64 not a MIPS64R2 but the abiflags correctly represents the fact it is a
MIPS64R2. Similar things happen for octeon+ where it has no e_flags
representation (only octeon) but is correctly reported in abiflags.

The solution I propose is that we allow the abiflags information to represent
the same or newer isa/arch than can be inferred from the e_flags data. This
glosses over the subtle inconsistencies here and allows for future extensions
to eventually migrate to abiflags.

There are however a few other options for fixing this issue such as adding new
BFD mach entries for the inconsistent ISAs and adding more EF_MACH entries.
There is a limit to how far this scales though as we will run out of EF_MACH
values eventually so the proposed fix still stands.

I have not done any new tests for this but we need at the very least a simple
single object test for every supported arch and ideally a dual input link test
to combine all pairs of architectures that are related by ISA extension.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]