This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [m68k 12/13] properly align within code


On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 00:28 +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Jeffrey Law wrote:
> 
> > > As I've shown proviously at least the m68k world has shrunk considerably.
> > I'm not doubting that.  The question is has the world shrunk enough that
> > you can simply remove support for an assembler variant that we have
> > supported for 20 years.
> 
> A lot of it has already been removed with the removals of many m68k 
> targets, e.g.:
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&revision=68962
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&revision=77518
I don't care about CRDS or SGS, I care about the MOTOROLA_SYNTAX
support.  That's all we're discussing at this point.

So I'll ask explicitly, can GCC currently generate MOTOROLA_SYNTAX
assembly code?  If yes, is it broken so badly that anyone trying
to use it would find it useless?

If you can answer no to the first question or yes to the second
question then I won't object to your changes.

If the answer is yes to the first question and no to the section
question, then I'm going to object to your patch because it 
changes the code we generate under MOTOROLA_SYNTAX.  THe path
to getting your patch installed would then be to ensure MOTOROLA_SYNTAX
will remain unchanged.


> Huh? I don't want to remove the Motorola syntax.
> In this case there's a HAVE_GAS_BALIGN_AND_P2ALIGN I can use.
> The other problem are the jump instructions, which don't have anything to 
> do with the real Motorola syntax. The "(MOTOROLA)" check doesn't selected 
> the Motorola syntax at all.
But some of your patches will change, likely in incompatible ways the 
code we generate for MOTOROLA_SYNTAX.  At least that's how I read your
change for the jump instructions.


> As long as it works nobody will complain...
Which is precisely why I suggested you could disable it for the
next release.  If we believe nobody is using it, then disabling
it should't affect anyone.  You can then remove it the next
release.

> Do you seriously want to delay _valid_ bug fixes for a release???
Not at all.  I'm saying you have to find a way to fix the bugs
without breaking MOTOROLA_SYNTAX or you have to show me that
it's highly unlikely anyone can be using MOTOROLA_SYNTAX in
the most recent GCC release.


Jeff



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]