This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ssnop for mips
"Ralf Baechle" <ralf@uni-koblenz.de> writes:
> I fear new members and extensions of the MIPS family grow faster than you
> can extend the ABI ...
One would hope that that'll slow down a bit with MIPS32 and MIPS64
being "standard."
> MIPS I - IV, MIPS32 and MIPS64 are well defined instruction sets. So
> disassembling those always by default should be fine. ASEs and customer
> specific extensions are a different issue.
Problem is, what about when MIPS I - V, MIPS32, MIPS64 instructions
conflict with specific processors' extensions?
e.g. say a processor provides MIPS I + special-purpose extensions (not
really an odd situation 8-), and some of those extension instructions
conflict with instruction encodings which later become "well-defined."
you compile with -mips1 because that's basically what the processor
is, and that's how the binaries get marked. but special-purpose
instructions (which conflict) that you've generated using inline
assembly will be incorrectly disassembled.
I still think you've gotta got with what the markings on the binary
say.
Anyway, "i'm done." 8-)
cgd