Re: Fix tlbsx instruction for PPC440

[Kumar Gala <kumar dot gala at freescale dot com>]

On Sep 27, 2004, at 1:18 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:

> Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au> writes:
>
> > On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 11:52:13AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>  >> It seems simplest to me to give this entire instruction family an
>  >> optional RT register, and not worry about which instructions are
> >> supported on which subarchitectures - hence PPC403|PPC440|BOOKE.
> >
>  > Works for me.? The architecture book says that where the result is
>  > stored is implementation dependent.
>
> Thanks.? Here's a patch against binutils HEAD.? I made the tests a bit
>  more comprehensive and put them with the other tlbsx tests (hence the
>  much longer delta to booke.d).? I'm still wondering whether it's
>  necessary to say PPC403|PPC440|BOOKE, or whether some subset of that
>  would do.

I think you could drop the PPC440 and just make it PPC403|BOOKE.

- kumar