This is the mail archive of the
cgen@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the CGEN project.
Re: Possible reloc patch (2/2)
Richard Sandiford writes:
> From the replies I've got, it seems to be generally accepted that having
> relocs point to the start of instructions is better than having them point
> to the start of operands. I'm just confused as to why. If a 32-bit
> address can occur at more than one place in an instruction, what do you
> gain by defining different relocs for each instruction format, rather than
> one that applies to the operand itself? My intuition behind a "reloc" was
> that it described a bit sequence that needed adjusting; that whether the
> bit sequence was part of an instruction or part of data wasn't really
> relevant.
A very good question to ask on the binutils list ...