Richard Henderson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 21, 2000 at 09:04:03PM +0000, Peter Rival wrote:
> As far as I can see, sqrttsu isn't an instruction in the Alpha Architecture
> handbook ...

You're looking at the wrong version.  It's an ev6 insn.

I'm looking at Version 4 - supposedly the newest one that isn't even in hardcopy.  I just don't normally look at the FP code, so I didn't notice the "Qualifiers" header - I had found sqrtt, but didn't notice that sqrttsu was a valid subset of the sqrtx instructions.  *sigh*  Too much on my mind...
 
Get a newer binutils.
 
Just how new are we talking?  I pulled down what I believe to be the latest one, both the -alpha.tar.gz and the source tarball and tried both.  Screenshot below:

/usr/src/gcc-2.95.2/gcc/xgcc -B/usr/src/gcc-2.95.2/gcc/ -B/usr/local/alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -c -g -O2 -fvtable-thunks -D_GNU_SOURCE -fno-implicit-templates  -mieee -I. -I./stl -I../libio -I./../libio -nostdinc++ -D_IO_MTSAFE_IO -DF `for N in MAIN ADDCC ADDCF ADDFC SUBCC SUBCF SUBFC MULCC MULCF MULFC DIVCC DIVCF DIVFC PLUS MINUS EQCC EQCF EQFC NECC NECF NEFC ABS ARG POLAR CONJ NORM COS COSH EXP LOG POWCC POWCF POWCI POWFC SIN SINH SQRT; do echo " -D${N}"; done` \
  ./cinst.cc -o fcomplex.o
/tmp/cciSfwJo.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/cciSfwJo.s:3626: Error: unknown opcode `sqrttsu'
/tmp/cciSfwJo.s:3696: Error: unknown opcode `sqrttsu'
make[4]: *** [bigstmp-complx] Error 1
make[4]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/gcc-2.95.2/alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu/ieee/libstdc++'
make[3]: *** [multi-do] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/gcc-2.95.2/alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++'
make[2]: *** [multi-all] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/gcc-2.95.2/alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++'
make[1]: *** [all-target-libstdc++] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/gcc-2.95.2'
make: *** [bootstrap] Error 2
[root@schooner gcc-2.95.2]# as -v
GNU assembler version 2.9.1 (alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu), using BFD version 2.9.1.0.25
[root@schooner gcc-2.95.2]# ld -v
GNU ld version 2.9.1 (with BFD 2.9.1.0.25)

As always, willing to believe I missed something else...

 - Pete

Reply via email to