Re: [PATCH] (Attempt to) Fix link compatibility check (was: Re:recent mips-elf linker "architecture ... incompatible" regressions)

[cgd at broadcom dot com]

At 19 Mar 2002 18:01:01 -0800, Eric Christopher wrote:
> Warn on cpus,

This i can get, but:

> warn on lack of ASE flags (or additional ASE flags,
> either),

This i don't understand.  Why not just merge them all into the result?

it's perfectly reasonable to combine two sets of code, one compiled
with an ASE and one compiled without.

In fact, is it really sane to produce a mips16 binary any other way?
(don't you typically include some mips16 code and some 'normal' mips
code in the same binary)?  And, shouldn't that binary be marked as
using the MIPS16 ASE?  8-)



chris