Re: [patch][rfc] Complex Relocations gas and bfd

[Dave Brolley <brolley at redhat dot com>]

Alan Modra wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 12:40:46PM -0500, Dave Brolley wrote:
>   
> > If you're trying to tell me that 0xff|255 is not a good value then I can 
> > change that as well.
> >     
>
> Yes, that's exactly what I was (cryptically) saying.  Existing object
> files for these targets may already be using 255.  The following
> appear to be available according to my scan over include/elf/*.h: 142,
> 143, 152, 155, 156, 157, 159, 197, 198, 199, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206,
> 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 217, 218, 225, 226.
> Perhaps it might be better to define the reloc on a target by target
> basis?
>   
I've spent about a day and a half now trying to find a way to define the 
reloc on a target by target basis. The problem always ends up being the 
there is no obvious way to get gas/cgen.c and bfd/elflink.c to #include 
the proper include/elf/<target>.h in order to pick up the reloc number.

If I'm missing something, then please let me know. Otherwise, I will 
likely pick a number from the list above and add a comment about 
conflicts with target specific reloc numbers.

Dave