[fpc-devel] Some Opcodes missing in internal assembler for mips32r2
mail at michael-ring.org
Tue Jun 18 12:24:46 CEST 2013
I did have a look at mips-opc.c in binutils, this looks easy to parse, I
will give this a try, thank you for the hint!
I will come back to you with a 2nd version, looks like a nice task to
complete while sitting in the train....
Am 17.06.13 08:12, schrieb Sergei Gorelkin:
> 16.06.2013 22:17, Michael Ring пишет:
>> I have now browsed through the current mips documentation and have
>> created a file that includes all
>> opcodes, the version they are first in (starting with mips32) and a
>> small comment what the mnemonic
>> This file is attached to this mail.
> The problem here is that MIPS32 is not the first, but fifth version of
> MIPS instruction sets, preceded by MIPS I, MIPS II, MIPS III and MIPS
> IV. Currently there is no separation between instructions sets in
> compiler sources, but they need to appear one day. MIPS32
> documentation is not correct in this respect, as it says e.g. that ADD
> is first supported by MIPS32, while it is actually MIPS I instruction.
> The most accurate source is probably the GNU Opcode library, which is
> part of binutils.
>> Out of this file it is easy to create both compiler/mips/strinst.inc
>> and compiler/mips/opcode.inc.
>> Now I am looking for additional lines that I will need to add to this
>> file, to find out what is
>> necessary I have created a list of mnemonics that exist only in the
>> original opcode.inc file (see
>> there are a number of entries in the form xxx64xxx and xxx32, xxxg
>> and dxxx, all those do not seem
>> to be valid for mips32 & up, where do those come from and which of
>> those do I need to add?
> xxx64xxx and xxxg are likely subject for removal, I've no idea where
> they came from. dxxx and xxx32 are MIPS III instructions, as well as
> sdr,sdl,lwu and alike. A lot of other stuff (la, li, neg, mulo, seq,
> etc.) are macros that are expanded into several instructions.
>> There's one very strange entry in opcode.inc: 'b '
>> there is also 'b', is it necessary to have 'b ' ?
> The codegenerator and optimizer expect conditional and unconditional
> branches to have distinct opcodes, this strange construction provides
> fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel at lists.freepascal.org
More information about the fpc-devel