This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Relocation question (was: RE: Unsupported targets slated forremoval)
- From: Christian Groessler <chris at groessler dot org>
- To: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
- Cc: <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 16:41:27 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: Relocation question (was: RE: Unsupported targets slated forremoval)
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Alan Modra wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 12:23:47PM +0200, Christian Groessler wrote:
> >
> > Please note the different VALUEs.
>
> Either of these is likely OK. In the second case, a reloc against a
> local symbol INITFN is being reduced to a reloc against a section
> symbol. With larger assembly files this optimization can reduce the
> size of the symbol table. You can tweak which relocs may be reduced
> with tc_fix_adjustable.
Thanks.
If I return 0 in tc_fix_adjustable the symbol name appears in the
relocation.
I find it more informative if the symbol name appears in the relocation,
but probaby other prefer the optimized version.
Makes it sense to make the tc_fix_adjustable return value user selectable?
Of course, only in cases where it doesn't matter technically.
I would implement a command line parameter to do this, and also modify the
other targets.
regards,
chris