This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: gas/i386/inval-equ-2 test


On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>>>> "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> 13.11.08 16:48 >>>
>>On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>>> H.J.,
>>>
>>> I'm trying to understand what this is really trying to verify - due to a
>>> supposedly unrelated change this test is failing for me. I'm seeing two
>>> possible problems with the test itself, though:
>>>
>>> For one, (%eax+1) can't really be considered a register symbol - I really
>>> think that it's an error for the assembler to keep the resulting symbol in
>>> reg_section (this should hold at least for all targets where
>>> md_register_arithmetic is zero). That's also one of my local changes - to
>>> force such things into expr_section.
>>>
>>> Secondly, using the equated symbols in an instruction implies that you
>>> expect the parser to happily accept the (invalid) construct, which I think
>>> is not the purpose of the test (and which also fails with my local change,
>>> because [validly] only reg_section symbols are accepted by
>>> parse_register()).
>>>
>>> Hence I would think that either the expressions ought to be changed to
>>> have plain registers on the right side, or the move instructions ought to
>>> be removed.
>>>
>>> Looking forward to read your opinion,
>>
>>I added it to avoid assembler crash. I don't mind you change it as long as
>>assembler doesn't crash and does reasonable things.
>
> I'm not sure we understand each other: How could changing the test case
> make the assembler crash? All I'm asking is how much of the test case is
> really relevant (and even valid), because based on my observations I
> have to assume that it sets expectations that are tied to the current gas
> implementation, not to what correct or validly to be expected behavior
> would demand.
>

The assembler used to crash on input in inval-equ-2.s. We changed the
assembler to issue an error instead. That is its only purpose.


-- 
H.J.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]