On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 19:50 +0800, chenglulu wrote: > > 在 2024/2/20 下午7:31, Xi Ruoyao 写道: > > On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 19:25 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > > > On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 10:07 +0800, chenglulu wrote: > > > > > > > So I think that without worrying about performance and ensuring that > > > > there is no problem > > > > > > > > with binutils, I think we can make the following modifications: > > > > > > > > -/* "nop" instruction 54525952 (andi $r0,$r0,0) is > > > > - used for padding. */ > > > > +/* ".align num,,4" will insert "nop"(andi $r0,$r0,0) into padding > > > > by > > > > + default. */ > > > > #define ASM_OUTPUT_ALIGN_WITH_NOP(STREAM, LOG) \ > > > > - fprintf (STREAM, "\t.align\t%d,54525952,4\n", (LOG)) > > > > + fprintf (STREAM, "\t.align\t%d,,4\n", (LOG)) > > > > > > > > What do you think of it? > > > Unfortunately it will cause warnings with GAS 2.41 or earlier like > > > > > > t1.s:1: Warning: expected fill pattern missing > > > t1.s:5: Warning: expected fill pattern missing > > > > > > And AFAIK these things may cause many test failures due to "excessive > > > errors" if running the GCC test suite with these earlier GAS versions. > > > Maybe we'll have to add some autoconf-based probing for the linker > > > anyway? > > Or just silence the warning passing "--no-warn" to the assembler but I'm > > highly unsure if this is really a good idea :(. > > > I am not opposed to adding detection code, but I looked at this problem > today > > and I think this change is the smallest change. I asked Meng Qinggang and he > > said that the warning of GAS 2.41 can be removed.
Yes, but we cannot change a released binutils-2.41 tarball and Binutils folks don't make point releases like GCC. -- Xi Ruoyao <xry...@xry111.site> School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
