Hi David,
2017-04-18 18:57 GMT+09:00 David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> This part ended up in redundant code after touched by multiple
>> people.
>>
>> [1] Commit 3234282f33b2 ("x86, asm: Fix CFI macro invocations to
>> deal with shortcomings in gas") added parentheses for defined
>> expressions to support old gas for x86.
>>
>> [2] Commit a22dcdb0032c ("x86, asm: Fix ancient-GAS workaround")
>> split the pattern into two to avoid parentheses for non-numeric
>> expressions.
>>
>> [3] Commit 95a2f6f72d37 ("Partially revert patch that encloses
>> asm-offset.h numbers in brackets") removed parentheses from numeric
>> expressions as well because parentheses in MN10300 assembly have a
>> special meaning (pointer access).
>>
>> Apparently, there is a conflict between [1] and [3]. After all,
>> [3] took precedence, and a long time has passed since then.
>
> There's a conflict between [1] and various assembly code formats. Some
> formats define, say,
>
> mov 4,r1
>
> to move the number 4 into register r1, and:
>
> mov (4),r1
>
> to move the contents of the memory at address 4 into r1. Therefore, you
> cannot simply wrap numeric operands in brackets. What might work is adding a
> '+' on the front, e.g.:
>
> mov +(4),r1
>
> David
OK, thanks for this info.
But, nobody has raised a flag about the reverted [1].
(perhaps, nobody cares about the old gas any more?)
So, I think this patch will be OK.
BTW, do you still maintain mn10300?
(Before, I worked for Panasonic, i.e. former Matsushita)
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
