------- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2009-06-30 12:03
-------
Hi Chris,
Right, I have checked in the (uploaded) patch to further improve the
consistency of the disassembler's output.
With regard to LFM and SFM I do still think that they should disassembled and
displayed as they currently are, even if the architecture has been set to one
that *might* not support them. In the spirit of compromise however I have added
the LDC and STC versions of the instructions as comments in the disassembler's
output.
So for example disassembling the binary values that have been mentioned in
this issue, I now get:
0: 4c585ee5 ldclmi 14, cr5, [r8], {229} ; 0xe5
4: 01a23597 undefined instruction 0x01a23597
8: 3d9da24e lfmcc f2, 1, [sp, #312] ; (ldccc 2, cr10, [sp,
#312]) ; 0x138
c: 46647659 strbmi r7, [r4], -r9, asr r6
10: 77c1cdb4 strbvc ip, [r1, r4, lsr sp]
14: e640361f strb r3, [r0], -pc, lsl r6
18: 4c585ee5 ldclmi 14, cr5, [r8], {229} ; 0xe5
1c: d446399e strble r3, [r6], #-2462 ; 0x99e
20: 11d87ed1 ldrsbne r7, [r8, #225] ; 0xe1
24: 44afa697 strtmi sl, [pc], #1687 ; 2c <foo+0x2c>
28: d4bf78b4 ldrtle r7, [pc], #2228 ; 30 <foo+0x30>
2c: bc041350 stclt 3, cr1, [r4], {80} ; 0x50
Cheers
Nick
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10288
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
