Home Original page

[patch] adjust libgloss addresses for 64-bit

Richard Sandiford rsandifo@redhat.com
Sat Apr 16 10:31:00 GMT 2005 
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> writes:
>  But in principle you are right for consistency the presence or the lack 
> of the "d" prefix should imply the size of the operands used as it is so 
> for other assembly instructions.  So how about disabling the "wrong" 
> macros completely?  That is using as_bad() for these two "dla/la used to 
> load..." messages just below "do_la" that are currently warnings.  After 
> all these load address macros are the only place where non-default address 
> calculation rules can be argued about at all -- the interpretation of 
> e.g.:
>
> lh	$2, 0x80000000
> lh	$2, 0x80000000($3)
> lh	$2, foo + 0x80000000($3)
> lh	$2, foo + 0xc000000080000000($3)
>
> is rather out of question, isn't it?

Yeah, FWIW, this sounds like a good idea to me.  I think these threads
show that there's no obvious answer and that whatever we do will surprise
someone.

Richard
More information about the Binutils mailing list