On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Dave Martin wrote: > So I've now come round to the view that we _should_ probably bite the > bullet and fix the inline asm directly. So: > > * We need to verify which binutils permit (and ignore) the IT > instructions in non-unified (ARM) syntax. I've observed that 2.19.1 > definitely supports this; I don't know about earlier versions -- this > is probably something the toolchain group should investigate. > * We should be proactive about making these changes upstream. > Writing some standard wording to explain the reason for the change and > the likely impact would probably be a good idea.
I hope there is at least a validation of the IT instructions by the assembler with regards to the condition codes on the following instructions (and vice versa) to make sure they are all coherent, and even so for ARM mode compilation. Nicolas _______________________________________________ linaro-toolchain mailing list linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
