From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
To: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>,
Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>,
binutils@sourceware.org
Cc: GDB patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
Openrisc <openrisc@lists.librecores.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] OpenRISC binutils updates and new relocs
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 16:29:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0aad2c15-5329-1d01-028f-2e9fcb14a783@twiddle.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aceede44-4ab0-9267-a949-5cd5f3c5e81e@redhat.com>
On 9/17/18 8:07 AM, Nick Clifton wrote:
> I do not see any need to add extra document for the new relocs, unless you
> have created new assembler pseudo-ops to generate them. (I did not see any
> code to add such operators, but I may have missed something).
There is new syntax for these new relocs, in the form of function-like markup.
E.g:
l.ori r3,r4,@lo(foo) # an existing reloc
l.ori r3,r4,@po(foo) # a new reloc added here
> I do have one question though. Is there a need to be able to distinguish
> between binaries that use the new l.adrp instruction and those that don't.
> For example if a library is built using the new instruction but then it is
> linked into an executable which is supposed to run on silicon which does
> not support the new instruction, should the linker issue an error ? If so,
> how does it detect this situation ?
I have never been a fan of how this is handled e.g. for mips.
To that end, I have done nothing at all. This is more in line
with how we (do not) handle this situation for x86.
r~
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-17 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-21 14:38 Stafford Horne
2018-08-21 14:39 ` [PATCH 3/4] or1k: Add the l.adrp insn and supporting relocations Stafford Horne
2018-08-21 14:39 ` [PATCH 4/4] or1k: Add the l.muld, l.muldu, l.macu, l.msbu insns Stafford Horne
2018-08-21 14:39 ` [PATCH 1/4] or1k: Add relocations for high-signed and low-stores Stafford Horne
2018-08-21 14:39 ` [PATCH 2/4] or1k: Fix messages for relocations in shared libraries Stafford Horne
2018-09-08 21:35 ` [PATCH 0/4] OpenRISC binutils updates and new relocs Stafford Horne
2018-09-17 15:07 ` Nick Clifton
2018-09-17 16:29 ` Richard Henderson [this message]
[not found] ` <20180918095234.GP4594@lianli.shorne-pla.net>
2018-09-18 11:55 ` Nick Clifton
2018-09-18 12:08 ` Joel Sherrill
2018-09-21 12:41 ` Stafford Horne
2018-09-19 13:23 ` Stafford Horne
2018-09-27 6:08 ` Stafford Horne
2018-09-28 15:39 ` Nick Clifton
2018-10-01 7:08 ` Stafford Horne
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0aad2c15-5329-1d01-028f-2e9fcb14a783@twiddle.net \
--to=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=nickc@redhat.com \
--cc=openrisc@lists.librecores.org \
--cc=shorne@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox