This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [patch] MIPS gas problems with gcc's explicit relocs

From: Nigel Stephens <nigel at mips dot com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at ds2 dot pg dot gda dot pl>
Cc: Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts at csv dot ica dot uni-stuttgart dot de>, Dominic Sweetman <dom at mips dot com>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 12:40:04 -0400
Subject: Re: [patch] MIPS gas problems with gcc's explicit relocs
Organization: MIPS Technologies
References: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0405281900120.7804@jurand.ds.pg.gda.pl> <87smdj226x.fsf@redhat.com> <20040603182005.GO6492@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <Pine.LNX.4.55.0406041048410.27769@jurand.ds.pg.gda.pl>

Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:

which I find consistent with my assumption addresses should be handled
uniformly universally.  The book was largely written by Dominic Sweetman
and Nigel Stephens, so perhaps they can express their opinions whether
using "la" for anything beyond symbol literals is broken or not.  I find
it a natural consequence of the macro being "load *address*" after all.

I agree with Maciej. The definition of the "la" macro surely requires that it must accept any address syntax that would be valid for "lw".

The "li" macro naturally rejects any non-immediate addresses as it's
"load *immediate*".

Yes, "la" is a superset of "li".

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch] MIPS gas problems with gcc's explicit relocs
  - From: Eric Christopher

References:
- Re: [patch] MIPS gas problems with gcc's explicit relocs
  - From: Thiemo Seufer
- Re: [patch] MIPS gas problems with gcc's explicit relocs
  - From: Maciej W. Rozycki

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]