YunQiang Su syq@debian.org
Tue Mar 17 02:08:38 GMT 2020

• Previous message (by thread): [PATCH][MIPS][Committed] Fix PR/gas 25539 fix_loongson3_llsc: fix when target has multi labels
• Next message (by thread): [PATCH] Support --no-rosegment.
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@linux-mips.org> 于2020年3月17日周二 上午9:49写道：
>
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2020, Paul Hua wrote:
>
> > When there is multi-labels on the same insn, the current code
> > will take care about the last one. it may cause that no sync
> > is added at the target.
>
>  Why do you need to set an arbitrary limit as to the number of labels
> handled (MAX_LABELS_SAME)?  This handles user-supplied input, so we can't

Yes. It is a problem. I did it fellow the scheme as MAX_LLSC_RANGE.
Maybe that we should use dynamic allocated memory to hold both of them.

> predict how many there will be at most.  What happens if the limit has
> been exceeded?

If exceeded the workaround won't work, aka no `sync' will be insert in
this case.

>
>  We should avoid setting unnecessary limits, as per our coding standards:
> <https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/standards.html#Semantics>.
>
>   Maciej

---

• Previous message (by thread): [PATCH][MIPS][Committed] Fix PR/gas 25539 fix_loongson3_llsc: fix when target has multi labels
• Next message (by thread): [PATCH] Support --no-rosegment.
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Binutils mailing list