This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] warning fix in BFD/elf-m10300.c
- From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
- To: Elias Athanasopoulos <eathan at otenet dot gr>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 15:31:22 +1030
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] warning fix in BFD/elf-m10300.c
- References: <20021102020720.A3985@neutrino.particles.org>
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 02:07:20AM +0200, Elias Athanasopoulos wrote:
> BTW, these:
>
> static const insn16 t2a1_push_insn = 0xb540;
> static const insn16 t2a2_ldr_insn = 0x4e03;
> static const insn16 t2a3_mov_insn = 0x46fe;
> static const insn16 t2a4_bx_insn = 0x4730;
> static const insn32 t2a5_pop_insn = 0xe8bd4040;
> static const insn32 t2a6_bx_insn = 0xe12fff1e;
>
> are defined in both elf32-arm.h and coff-arm.c, and they are used
> only by the latter. Should we remove them from elf32-arm.h or remove
> them from coff-arm.c and include elf32-arm.h (or leave them as they
> are)?
I'll remove them from elf32-arm.h.
> * elf-m10300.c (elf32_mn10300_finish_hash_table_entry): Don't
> check if entry->stack_size is < 256.
> (mn10300_elf_relax_section): Don't check if sym_hash->stack_size
> is < 256.
I think it is better to leave the code as it.
--
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre