assemby code msp430
hi, i am using the msp430-as assembler with -mmcu=msp430x147. the above controller has a code address space from 0x8000. but whenever i include ".org 0x8000" at the beginning of the code and follow it with a mov command like mov #0x5A80,0x0120, i get the output "operand out of range: 32784 (or a similar number)" Cheers, adi ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
.set in GAS
Hi, I have few questions about following code, .set tuv, 1 .long tuv .set tuv, _undef+2 .long tuv For first .long the symbol tuv evaluates to 1. But for second it is just 2, relocation information for _undef is not generated in ELF file. I am using GNU assembler 2.15 Please let me know if this is a feature? (absolute value has high priority?) or a bug. Thanks in advance. Best Reagrds, Jaydeep Jaydeep S. Patil Samsung Electronics Co, Ltd. System SW Lab San #24 Nongseo-Ri, Giheung-Eup Yongin-City, Gyeonggi-Do, Korea 449-711 O: +82-31-209-9975 R: +82-31-205-4764 M: +82-10-2751-7333 ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Reporting bugs in GAS
Hi, Please let me know where can I report GNU Assembler bugs. Thanks in advance. Best Reagrds, Jaydeep Jaydeep S. Patil Samsung Electronics Co, Ltd. System SW Lab San #24 Nongseo-Ri, Giheung-Eup Yongin-City, Gyeonggi-Do, Korea 449-711 O: +82-31-209-9975 R: +82-31-205-4764 M: +82-10-2751-7333 ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Re: Reporting bugs in GAS
PatilSubhash Jayadeep <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Please let me know where can I report GNU Assembler bugs. http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Ian ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/835] New: Fails to build in 64bit mode
binutils-2.15 does not compile in 64bit mode due to the fact that, starting in AIX5.2, in 64bit, we do not support the old format of vm-info and core-dump. I made changes in bfd/rs6000-core.c that I can provide you with, basically #ifdef ing out the references to the "old" part of the core-dump and vm-info unions. -- Summary: Fails to build in 64bit mode Product: binutils Version: 2.15 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com ReportedBy: ft at fr dot ibm dot com CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org GCC build triplet: powerpc-ibm-aix5.2.0.0 GCC host triplet: powerpc-ibm-aix5.2.0.0 GCC target triplet: powerpc-ibm-aix5.2.0.0 http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=835 --- 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
[Bug ld/834] IA64: Change br to brl for "far" branches when possible
--- Additional Comments From jsworley at qwest dot net 2005-04-08 16:56
---
One other note: GCC (at least) can issue a .bbb bundle where
the first two branches are NOPs. This case should be
converted to
{ .mlx
nop
--
http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=834
--- 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
[Bug binutils/824] "make install" fails when configuring with a relative path to the sources
--- Additional Comments From drow at sources dot redhat dot com 2005-04-08 17:33 --- Already fixed in CVS and for 2.16. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 179 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=824 --- 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
[Bug admin/179] Installation fails on binutils 2.15 on Solaris 8/9
--- Additional Comments From drow at sources dot redhat dot com 2005-04-08 17:33 --- *** Bug 824 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||jbuck at welsh-buck dot org http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=179 --- 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
[Bug gas/836] New: GAS ".set" pseudo op-code handling
Hi, I am using GNU assembler 2.15 (on WIN 2000) I have few questions about ".set" pseudo op-code Please check with following codes. 1) .set tuv, 1 .long tuv .set tuv, _undef+2 .long tuv In above case first .long evaluates to .long 1 But in second .long no relocation information is generated, _undef is droped. Should GAS generate any relocation here? 2) .set tuv, _undef .set tuv, tuv+1 .long tuv For above code GAS showed "symbol definition loop encountered" error. But if you change def of 'tuv' as, .set tuv, 1 .set tuv, tuv+_undef .long tuv Then no error is generated (but no relocation also). Is that the absolute value gets the high priority? Please let me know how ".set" is processed. Thanks in advance Best regards Jay -- Summary: GAS ".set" pseudo op-code handling Product: binutils Version: unspecified Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: gas AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com ReportedBy: jp dot subhash at samsung dot com CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=836 --- 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
[Bug gas/836] GAS ".set" pseudo op-code handling
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-04-09 03:41 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 827 *** -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=836 --- 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
[Bug gas/827] .set expression limitations
--- Additional Comments From amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-04-09 03:41 --- *** Bug 836 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- What|Removed |Added CC||jp dot subhash at samsung ||dot com http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=827 --- 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
