This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Add ARM to gas .file/.loc tests
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>
- To: Richard dot Earnshaw at arm dot com
- Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 07:25:10 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: Add ARM to gas .file/.loc tests
On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > > On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> I (H-P) wrote:
> > > I think it'd be better to use ".long 0" universally. Then the
> > > target-dependent insn=some-nop settings can go.
>
> > .long 0 is not a recognized nop on the ARM (it doesn't do very much, but
> > it isn't strictly a nop). So what do we want? A nop? or a zero?
>
> Something that fills code-space so the dwarf2 line number
> indicators move. It doesn't matter what it does in terms of
> being an instruction.
>
> Oh wait, then it doesn't trig the tc-*.c code or indicate the
> absence of it.
(Arguing with myself after checking:) But that's not what is
tested; it's that ".file" and ".loc" directives don't cause
errors! So ".long 0" should be as fine for this test, as it is
for various binutils tests.
brgds, H-P