Home Original page

Release 2.21.1 ?

Alan Modra amodra@gmail.com
Wed Mar 16 12:17:00 GMT 2011 
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 09:50:35AM +0100, Tristan Gingold wrote:
> 
> On Mar 16, 2011, at 7:44 AM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > while handling several breakages in linux-next kernel, it showed PR
> > gas/12519 (see [1]) is somehow incomplete as it gives no pointer to
> > the symbol name in case of an error.
> > "Mention symbol name in non-constant .size expression." (see [2]) as a
> > follow-up patch definitely helps to enlighten developer's where to dig
> > into occuring problems.
> > "Revert the last change on gas/elf/bad-size.err." (see [3]) is a fixup to [2].
> > 
> > It would be nice to see [2] and [3] backported to 2.21-branch.
> 
> Why not.
> 
> Does it make sense to generate a warning instead of an error in 2.21.1 for backward bug-compatibility ?
> Alan, what's your opinion ?

Well, it's plain wrong to accept bad expressions and have gas try to
guess what typos mean, so I think it should be an error.  The size
info matters to some people.  Ask gdb developers, or anyone writing
code analysis and optimization tools.

I also think it highly likely that new binutils and/or gcc will break
kernel bisection in other areas.  For that reason I'm inclined to
discount the kernel list histrionics over the .size fix.  Kernel
kiddies are just going to have to learn to deal with toolchain
evolution.

-- 
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM
More information about the Binutils mailing list