[PATCH/RFA] sh-elf: Unnecessary relocations
kaz Kojima
kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp
Thu Sep 26 21:27:00 GMT 2002
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Thu Sep 26 21:27:00 GMT 2002
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH/RFA] sh-elf: Unnecessary relocations
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH/RFA] sh-elf: Unnecessary relocations
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com> wrote: > I think the point is that those relocations are for > *immediately* nearby addresses; they can't reach more than > something like 1 << 8 or 1 << 12 bytes. It'd be a gcc bug to > generate them for global symbols that can be overridden. I > think the patch should be corrected to check for R_SH_DIR8WPL > and R_SH_IND12W (or really, the BFD names) since there > supposedly exists other PC-relative relocations that should be > generated for global symbols in the same object. That includes > the 32-bit pcrel reloc (whatever the SH ELF name; I think the > BFD name is BFD_RELOC_32_PCREL). Right? Ah, yes. My patch might be overkill. It seems that the old tc-sh.c handles the following 6 relocations as such relocations: BFD_RELOC_SH_PCDISP12BY2 BFD_RELOC_SH_PCRELIMM8BY2 BFD_RELOC_SH_PCRELIMM8BY4 BFD_RELOC_8_PCREL BFD_RELOC_SH_SWITCH16 BFD_RELOC_SH_SWITCH32 I'll make a revised patch with checking these relocations. Thanks, kaz
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH/RFA] sh-elf: Unnecessary relocations
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH/RFA] sh-elf: Unnecessary relocations
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list