Re: MIPS md_apply_fix()(?) problem.

[Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>]

On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 04:27:10PM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote:
> 
> Then I was going to add a new bitfield to the fixup which would
> fixup_segment would set if it had added in the symbol's value before
> calling md_apply_fix3.  Backends could then examine this flag and undo
> the addition if they wanted to.  In fact it might be better to have a
> target specific macro that fixup_segment uses to check to see whether
> it should add in the symbol's value in the first place.

I'm of the opinion that there's a serious problem with the md_apply_fix3
interface.
  a) We have hacks and tweaks inside a function to undo the caller's
     actions.  That shouldn't be necessary.
  b) Comments like the following, taken from tc-ppc.c
      /* FIXME: Why '+'?  Better yet, what exactly is '*valuep'
	 supposed to be?  I think this is related to various similar
	 FIXMEs in tc-i386.c and tc-sparc.c.  */

Of course, pointing out architectural problems is a little different
to fixing them, and I haven't studied the code with a view to rewriting
it.  :)

Alan