Re: PATCH: More mips3264 support

[cgd at broadcom dot com]

"Eric Christopher" <echristo@redhat.com> writes:
> cgd wrote:
> > > 	* mips-dis.c: Add support for bfd_mach_mipsisa32 and
> > > 	bfd_mach_mipsisa64.
> > 
> > puzzled about these (and the related changes elsewhere that use them).
> > "MIPS32 and MIPS64 ISA" is what the existing bfd_mach_mips5 and
> > bfd_mach_mips64 were meant to address.

actually, there was a typo there; the first was supposed to be
bfd_mach_mips32.

> > Why are new constants needed?  Am I missing something Subtle here?
> > 
> > (mips64isa is a name in mips_cpu_info_table in gas only because
> > historically mips64 is taken.)
> > 
> > As target names go, I think i'm fine with mipsisa64, though, so stuff
> > related to adding that is OK by me.
> > 
> 
> Yes.  Basically using MIPS32 and MIPS64 ISA are, IMO, confusing.  This
> way we've separated out the base core (isa32 and isa64) for the newer
> versions of the assembler/compiler.

Not sure what this means in terms of changes to the source.

If you plan to keep the bfd_mach_mipsisa32 & bfd_mach_mipsisa64
constant names, i suggest you do the same for bfd_mach_mipsisa5, and
nuke the bfd_mach_mips{32,64}.  Shouldn't need both sets, since the
latter are meant to describe the ISAs rather than particular
processors.


> Anyhow, I'll produce another set for you and Nick to comment on as soon
> as I'm able to remerge all of my changes.

Great!  8-)


chris