blob: cc0aa48288cf45090886c31f2e4e01c6973149c9 (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
|
* Writing out ELF files is close to working but the following needs to
be examined more closely:
- ELF relocation records are incorrect because the function
ELFObjectWriter::RecordRelocation is hard coded for X86/X86-64.
- Relocations use 2-byte / 4-byte to terminology in reference to
the size of the immediate value being changed. The Xilinx
terminology seems to be (???) 4-byte / 8-byte in reference
to the number of bytes of instructions that are being changed.
- BRLID and like instructions are always assumed to use a 4-byte
immediate value for the relocation and BEQID and like instructions
are always assumed to use a 2-byte immediate value for the relocation.
I think this means that conditional branches like BEQID can only
branch += 32768 bytes (~8192 instructions). We should allow conditional
branches to use 4-byte relocations but I'm not sure how to do that
right now.
- Relocation records for indirect calls are not being generated
correctly. These should emit and IMM 0 directly before the ORI
instruction that loads the register (just like when a BRLID
instruction is used instead of an ORI).
* Code generation seems to work relatively well now but the following
needs to be examined more closely:
- The stack layout needs to be examined to make sure it meets
the standard, especially in regards to var arg functions.
- The delay slot filler is ad hoc but seems to work. Load and
store instructions were prevented from being moved to delay
slots but I'm not sure that is necessary.
- The processor itineraries are copied from a different backend
and need to be updated to model the MicroBlaze correctly.
- Look at the MBlazeGenFastISel.inc stuff and make use of it
if appropriate.
* A basic assembly parser is present now and seems to parse most things.
There are a few things that need to be looked at:
- There are some instructions that are not generated by the backend
and have not been tested as far as the parser is concerned.
- The assembly parser does not use any MicroBlaze specific directives.
I should investigate if there are MicroBlaze specific directive and,
if there are, add them.
- The instruction MFS and MTS use special names for some of the
special registers that can be accessed. These special register
names should be parsed by the assembly parser.
|
