Re: as problem
On 19 Jan 2002, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> > > This works if I pass -Wa,-mpca56. But it will *not* work if I also use
> > > -mcpu=ev56 for gcc, since gcc then emits .arch ev56 into the .s, and
> > > as complains ev56 can't handle unpkbw. What should I do? Convince gcc
> > > not to emit .arch? Convince as to prefer the command line option? Some
> > > other suggestions?
> >
> > Basically, you can't use any of those MVI extensions on any processor that
> > doesn't support it (>= PCA56, IIRC). That code should probably have a
> > conditional around it that depends on an amask check of the processor's
> > support for MVI.
>
> Yes, I know, and it is protected by amask. I just want it to
> compile/assemble, but the assembler refuses to do so if it finds .arch
> ev56.
So you want ev56 scheduling with pca56 instruction support to get this to
assemble? IIRC, the scheduling code between the two processors doesn't
differ...only it's instruction support. '-mcpu=pca56 -mno-bwx' may
allow it to compile and assemble while disabling generation of code to use
the BWX instruction sets (which aren't present on ev56, but are on pca56).
C
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: as problem
- From: Falk Hueffner <falk.hueffner@student.uni-tuebingen.de>