This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: bfd/archures.c and bfd_mach_ppc
- From: Jimi X <jimix at watson dot ibm dot com>
- To: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 08:45:33 -0500
- Subject: Re: bfd/archures.c and bfd_mach_ppc
- References: <15441.44143.644037.672241@kitch0.watson.ibm.com><20020125231335.GJ16187@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au>
>>>>> "AM" == Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au> writes:
AM> Hmm, I guess the real bug is in
AM> the order in which the archs are scanned. cpu-powerpc.c ought to
AM> look at bfd_mach_ppc _last_. Could you try the attached diff?
yes, this solves that problem, thankyou.
This is no biggie.. but..
I wanted to create a cpu-powerpc.c 64-bit default definition that was
not the powerpc_620 since someone might define a core register set for
it. So I added:
{
64, /* 64 bits in a word */
64, /* 64 bits in an address */
8, /* 8 bits in a byte */
bfd_arch_powerpc,
bfd_mach_ppc,
"powerpc",
"powerpc:common",
3,
BFD_DEFAULT_TARGET_SIZE == 64, /* default for 64 bit target */
powerpc_compatible,
bfd_default_scan,
&bfd_powerpc_archs[13]
},
(following you changes I made it the second last), unfortunately now
that bfd_mach_ppc still is 0 the first entry becomes the default.
so I added:
.#define bfd_mach_ppc64 1
to archures.c and used it in the entry above.
is this cool with you?
-JX