<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" id="owaParaStyle"></style>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" fpstyle="1" ocsi="0">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;">
<div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">The patch looks ok to me, and I am fine it gets committed if it resolves </font><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">a real issue for someone. </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">Is
there a real issue behind?</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">I mean, if you </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">can already patch it locally and compile it, is there a burden of having that</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;"> as
a local patch?</span></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">The thing is that patches like this one reduce readability, and the only </font><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">benefit is that we can still use the old toolchain that does not </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">recognize
symbolic names.</span></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Can you work the other way and update/patch the binutils so it </font><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">recognizes symbolic register names?</span></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Petar</font></div>
</div>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 16px;">_______________________________________________</span><br>
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000; font-size: 16px">
<div>
<div class="moz-forward-container">
<div class="gmail_quote">From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Brian Callahan</b> <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:bcallah@devio.us" target="_blank">bcallah@devio.us</a>></span><br>
Date: Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:48 AM<br>
Subject: [llvm-commits] [PATCH] MipsJITInfo.cpp on OpenBSD<br>
To: <a href="mailto:llvm-commits@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank">llvm-commits@cs.uiuc.edu</a><br>
<br>
<br>
Hi list --<br>
<br>
A few days ago I submitted a patch to the LLVM Bugzilla (<a href="http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14721" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=14721</a>) regarding an LLVM build failure on OpenBSD/mips64el. I was asked to send the patch
here.<br>
<br>
Here is a summary of the bug report:<br>
Mips register patch<br>
<br>
binutils on OpenBSD is quite old, which causes the build on mips64el to fail on MipsJITInfo.cpp - it complains of illegal operands. The attachment patches it so that it will build. All the patch does is replace the register aliases with the actual register
(i.e. changing $t8 to $24). The registers are identical to both mips and mips64, so it should not disrupt 32-bit Mips builds.<br>
<br>
The patch attached to this email is slightly different from the one submitted to Bugzilla, this patch supersedes the Bugzilla one.<br>
<br>
I am not subscribed to this list; please CC me on any replies.<br>
<br>
Thanks.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
~Brian<br>
</font></span><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
llvm-commits mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@cs.uiuc.edu" target="_blank">llvm-commits@cs.uiuc.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits" target="_blank">http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits</a><br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>