[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       uclinux-dev
Subject:    Re: [uClinux-dev] m68k-gcc-elf assembler error with 68000
From:       Georges Menie <g.menie () wanadoo ! fr>
Date:       2003-05-31 8:44:47
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Jonathan

I am also using uClinux on a 68k board, panic.c is compiled with the
right options, I don't think it is a compiler bug, You should check
config.h to see if your are enabling inline assembly code which should
not be enabled.
Try to compile 'manually' panic.c and add the -E option to gcc, this
will make it to stop after the preprocessing, then you will be able to
see where the mulul comes from (if it is inline asm...)

Georges

On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 04:55, Jonathan L Long wrote:
> I have a problem compiling uClinux for the straight 68000. I get an
> assembler error when compilation reaches panic.c:
> 
> m68k-elf-gcc -fno-builtin -DNO_CACHE -D__KERNEL__
> -I/usr/local/uClinux-dist/linux-2.4.x/include  -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes
> -Wno-trigraphs -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -fomit-frame-pointer
> -pipe -DNO_MM -DNO_FPU -DNO_CACHE -m68000 -D__ELF__ -DMAGIC_ROM_PTR
> -DNO_FORGET -DUTS_SYSNAME="uClinux" -D__linux__   -nostdinc -iwithprefix
> include -DKBUILD_BASENAME=panic  -c -o panic.o panic.c
> {standard input}: Assembler messages:
> {standard input}:128: Error: invalid instruction for this architecture;
> needs 68020 or 68030 or 68040 or 68060 or cpu32 or 5200 -- statement
> `mulul %d4,%d0:%d1' ignored
> 
> It seems that m68k-gcc-elf is generating invalid assembly even though
> -m68000 option is used. panic.c has no inline asm and 'mulul
> %d4,%d0:%d1' is not in any assembly files in the source tree. There are,
> however, similar inline asm statements, but I am not very familiar with
> what gcc inline assembly could generate such a line. (There are mulul
> statements in asm headers in panic.c.) If anyone has information as to
> if there could be a problem with m68k-gcc-elf or what else could be the
> origin of a the aforementioned offending statement (and for bonus
> points, how I could fix it) that would be much appreciated. Thanks in
> advance,
> -- 
> Jonathan L Long <longjonathan@comcast.net>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> uClinux-dev mailing list
> uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
> http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
> This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org


_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]