This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Ping: [RFC,Patch,AVR]: ad PR13503: Add new relocs to TC_VALIDATE_FIX?
- From: Denis Chertykov <chertykov at gmail dot com>
- To: Georg-Johann Lay <avr at gjlay dot de>
- Cc: binutils at sourceware dot org, Eric Weddington <eric dot weddington at atmel dot com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 11:54:10 +0400
- Subject: Re: Ping: [RFC,Patch,AVR]: ad PR13503: Add new relocs to TC_VALIDATE_FIX?
- References: <502B43D1.5040506@gjlay.de> <503A6547.7010901@gjlay.de>
2012/8/26 Georg-Johann Lay <avr@gjlay.de>:
> Just a ping for
>
> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2012-08/msg00270.html
>
>> Hi, in gas/config/tc-avr.h there is the following comment
>> to TC_VALIDATE_FIX:
>>
>> /* We don't want gas to fixup the following program memory related
>> relocations.
>> We will need them in case that we want to do linker relaxation.
>> We could in principle keep these fixups in gas when not relaxing.
>> However, there is no serious performance penilty when making the linker
>> make the fixup work. Check also that fx_addsy is not NULL, in order to
>> make
>> sure that the fixup refers to some sort of lable. */
>>
>> PR13503 introduced new relocs that are not mentioned in TC_VALIDATE_FIX.
>>
>> The attached patch adds the new BFD_RELOC_AVR_8_LO, BFD_RELOC_AVR_8_HI,
>> BFD_RELOC_AVR_8_HLO to that exclude list.
>>
>> I cannot say if these new relocs need to be handled there, if the must
>> be handled there or must *not* be handled there. I just noticed that
>> the new relocs are missing there, but no clue if that's good or bad or
>> simply does not matter...
>>
>> Thus please review this patch. And in the case it is actually needed,
>> please apply it.
>>
>>
>> Johann
>>
>>
>> gas/
>> PR 13503
>> * config/tc-avr.h (TC_VALIDATE_FIX): Skip: BFD_RELOC_AVR_8_LO,
>> BFD_RELOC_AVR_8_HI, BFD_RELOC_AVR_8_HLO.
>>
>
Seems right, but I don't remember some BFD nuances.
Denis.