Re: Fixing m68k movec disassembly
"Jonathan S. Shapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Also, my impression is that the target CPU *can* be specified on the > command line (via -m), and in that case greater precision is possible. > I'ld like to update the patch to deal with that. Assuming that the user > has told us a CPU on the command line via -m, how can that cpu name be > found from code running in opcodes/m68k-dis.c? It's the bfd_mach value in info->mach. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED] SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Fixing m68k movec disassembly
I've gotten annoyed enough to want to fix something :-) The disassembly logic for M68k MOVEC is awful. To do it right requires knowledge of the actual target CPU model, and we don't have that from BFD. We *do* have the target architecture level, and we can at least use that to refine the output. My proposal is that m68k disassembly should only emit a movec register mnemonic when it actually knows (based on target arch) that the mnemonic is correct. In other cases it should emit the numeric register number. I have some code that sensitizes the mnemonic selection to target architecture variant, but I would appreciate feedback on whether this seems sensible before submitting the patch. Also, my impression is that the target CPU *can* be specified on the command line (via -m), and in that case greater precision is possible. I'ld like to update the patch to deal with that. Assuming that the user has told us a CPU on the command line via -m, how can that cpu name be found from code running in opcodes/m68k-dis.c? Thanks shap ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
