[RFC PATCH 4/8] powerpc/ppc_asm: use plain numbers for registers

Nicholas Piggin npiggin at gmail.com
Fri Mar 19 12:39:05 AEDT 2021


Excerpts from Daniel Axtens's message of February 26, 2021 10:12 am:
> Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel.crashing.org> writes:
> 
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 02:10:02PM +1100, Daniel Axtens wrote:
>>> This is dumb but makes the llvm integrated assembler happy.
>>> https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/764
>>
>>> -#define	r0	%r0
>>
>>> +#define	r0	0
>>
>> This is a big step back (compare 9a13a524ba37).
>>
>> If you use a new enough GAS, you can use the -mregnames option and just
>> say "r0" directly (so not define it at all, or define it to itself).
>>
>> ===
>>         addi 3,3,3
>>         addi r3,r3,3
>>         addi %r3,%r3,3
>>
>>         addi 3,3,3
>>         addi r3,r3,r3
>>         addi %r3,%r3,%r3
>> ===
>>
>> $ as t.s -o t.o -mregnames
>> t.s: Assembler messages:
>> t.s:6: Warning: invalid register expression
>> t.s:7: Warning: invalid register expression
>>
>>
>> Many people do not like bare numbers.  It is a bit like not wearing
>> seatbelts (but so is all assembler code really: you just have to pay
>> attention).  A better argument is that it is harder to read for people
>> not used to assembler code like this.
>>
>> We used to have "#define r0 0" etc., and that was quite problematic.
>> Like that "addi r3,r3,r3" example, but also, people wrote "r0" where
>> only a plain 0 is allowed (like in "lwzx r3,0,r3": "r0" would be
>> misleading there!)
> 
> So an overarching comment on all of these patches is that they're not
> intended to be ready to merge, nor are they necessarily what I think is
> the best solution. I'm just swinging a big hammer to see how far towards
> LLVM_IAS=1 I can get on powerpc, and I accept I'm going to have to come
> back and clean things up.
> 
> Anyway, noted, I'll push harder on trying to get llvm to accept %rN:
> there was a patch that went in after llvm-11 that should help.

If you put it under ifdef CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG in the meantime I think 
that would be okay. Then we get error checking with gcc compiles and
llvm at least builds with its assembler which would be nice.

Thanks,
Nick


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list