H8S Bug when using -relax for h8300-elf

[Paul]

>
>
>Yes - my patch just stops the linker from core dumping, it does not
>implement relaxing for this form of addressing mode.  That is because
>I am completely unfamiliar with the H8300 instruction set, so I do not
>know how the instruction should be relaxed.
>
>If you would care to look over the code in elf32_h8_relax_section()
>you may be able to work out what needs to be done.  I assume that this
>part of the patch:
>
>> ! 		  case 0x20:
>> ! 		  case 0xa0:
>> ! 		    /* Skip 32bit versions.  */
>> ! 		    skip = TRUE;
>> ! 		    break;
>
>needs to be changed to be similar to this part:
>
>> ! 		  case 0x00:
>> ! 		    bfd_put_8 (abfd, (code & 0xf) | 0x20,
>>   			       contents + irel->r_offset - 2);
>> ! 		    break;
>> ! 		  case 0x80:
>> ! 		    bfd_put_8 (abfd, (code & 0xf) | 0x30,
>>   			       contents + irel->r_offset - 2);
>> ! 		    break;
>
>Cheers
>        Nick
>
mov.b @aa:8,Rd  --> 2<rd> <abs:8>
mov.b @aa:16,Rd --> 6a 0<rd> <abs:16>
mov.b @aa:32,Rd --> 6a 2<rd> <abs:32>

So the changes are
		  case 0x20:
> ! 		    bfd_put_8 (abfd, (code & 0xf) | 0x20,
>   			       contents + irel->r_offset - 2);
> ! 		    break;

                  case 0xa0:
> ! 		    bfd_put_8 (abfd, (code & 0xf) | 0x30,
>   			       contents + irel->r_offset - 2);
> ! 		    break;

0x00 and 0x80 only apply to 16 bit address formats.

BUT  later on only two bytes are deleted when four bytes should be deleted
and what about irel->r_offset it has now moved back one location.  Should
irel->r_offset  be changed?  Should it be changed before the delete 
bytes call or after?

Paul Clarke