[patch] adjust libgloss addresses for 64-bit
Richard Sandiford
rsandifo@redhat.com
Sat Apr 16 10:31:00 GMT 2005
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org> writes:
> But in principle you are right for consistency the presence or the lack
> of the "d" prefix should imply the size of the operands used as it is so
> for other assembly instructions. So how about disabling the "wrong"
> macros completely? That is using as_bad() for these two "dla/la used to
> load..." messages just below "do_la" that are currently warnings. After
> all these load address macros are the only place where non-default address
> calculation rules can be argued about at all -- the interpretation of
> e.g.:
>
> lh $2, 0x80000000
> lh $2, 0x80000000($3)
> lh $2, foo + 0x80000000($3)
> lh $2, foo + 0xc000000080000000($3)
>
> is rather out of question, isn't it?
Yeah, FWIW, this sounds like a good idea to me. I think these threads
show that there's no obvious answer and that whatever we do will surprise
someone.
Richard
More information about the Binutils
mailing list