Re: [PATCH] x86: adjust relocation overflow complaint types

["H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 02:12:03PM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com> writes:
> 
> > For what it's worth, I agree with Michael.  R_386_PC16 reliably wraps
> > around in 16-bit code.
> 
> But then it shouldn't be represented internally as BFD_RELOC_16_PCREL,
> since that has different semantics.
> 

Those relocations aren't in the i386 psABI. They were added by

Wed Aug  7 12:12:03 1996  Ian Lance Taylor  <ian@cygnus.com>

        * cpu-i386.c (i8086_arch): Architecture info for the i8086.

        Based on patches from Eric Valette <valette@crf.canon.fr>:
        * elf32-i386.c (enum reloc_type): Add FIRST_INVALID_RELOC,
        LAST_INVALID_RELOC, R_386_16, R_386_PC16, R_386_8, R_386_PC8.

It looks like they were intended for 16bit codes. But we were using
them for 32bit codes. I don't know if it is a good idea since those
object files won't be compatible with othe i386 linkers.

I'd like to restricts those relocations to 16bit code. Jan, what do
you think?


H.J.