Re: -m68020 -fnobitfields != -mcpu32 ?

• Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:34:41 +1000 (EST)
• From:
  Timothy Potter <timbo@moshpit.air.net.au>
• Reply-To:
  Timothy Potter <timbo@moshpit.air.net.au>
• cc: crossgcc@cygnus.com
• Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
• In-Reply-To: <199610151517.KAA15076@eli.wariat.org>

On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Robert J. Brown wrote:

>     Timothy> The Motorola CPU32 is nearly a 68020 lacking only the
>     Timothy> bitfield instructions and a couple of addressing modes

[more stuff]

> Try telling gcc to output assembler source code, then assembling it
> with the -m68020 -fnobitfields options.  This should flag as errors
> any place where the unsupported instructions occurred.  I suspect this
> will be relatively infrequent.  You can either patch the assembler
> code, of edit the C source to generate different instructions.  I know
> it kludgy, but its pragmatic.

I actually use the -Wa,-m68360 linker command to check for unsupported
instructions.  A couple of bitfield instructions are generated when I 
recompile newlib patched for rtems.  I guess I'll just have to upgrade to 
gcc 2.7.2.1.


Thanks guys!!


Tim.

> 
> -- 
> --------  "And there came a writing to him from Elijah"  [2Ch 21:12]  --------
> Robert Jay Brown III  rj@eli.wariat.org  http://eli.wariat.org  1 847 705-0424
> Elijah Laboratories Inc.;  37 South Greenwood Avenue;  Palatine, IL 60067-6328
> -----  M o d e l i n g   t h e   M e t h o d s   o f   t h e   M i n d  ------
> 

• Re: -m68020 -fnobitfields != -mcpu32 ?
• From: heard@vvnet.com (C. M. Heard/VVNET, Inc.)

• Re: -m68020 -fnobitfields != -mcpu32 ?
• From: "Robert J. Brown" <rj@eli.wariat.org>

• Prev: Re: -m68020 -fnobitfields != -mcpu32 ?
• Next: Re: -m68020 -fnobitfields != -mcpu32 ?
• Index: Cross gcc Mailing list
• Thread: Cross gcc Mailing list