Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Oct 2006 01:49:44 +0100 | From | Al Viro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] m68k: more workarounds for recent binutils idiocy |
| |
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 12:12:05AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> writes: > > > cretinous thing doesn't believe that (%a0)+ is one macro argument and > > splits it in two; worked around by quoting the argument... > > What version are you using? Works rather fine here with 2.17.
There are two problems; see below for the testcase covering both .macro a x .byte 1 .endm a.x a %(a0)+
Old binutils (i.e. what Roman's code expects) treat the above as .byte 1 .byte 1
That behaviour exists in 2.16.1 and earlier. Everything starting at least with 2.16.90.0.2 and up to current CVS generates Error: Unknown operator -- statement `a.x' ignored for line 4. That's the problem dealt with by the first patch (and yes, current gas from CVS does blow on arch/m68k/math-emu/ as soon as you get to getuser.l <something>).
_Another_ problem manifests as Error: too many positional arguments in line 5. That had been introduced later (in 2.16.91.0.3, if you look at versions on kernel.org, or 2005-08-08 in mainline) and had been fixed since then (2.16.91.0.7 or 2006-02-28 in CVS). That's what the second patch dealt with and yes, I agree that just slapping "don't use those versions of binutils" in Documentation/Changes is a better variant.
The first problem still needs to be dealt with. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |