[PATCH v2 03/10] BFD: Rename `*_set_reloc' to `*_finalize_section_relocs'

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Mon, 10 Nov 2025, Jan Beulich wrote:

> >>> --- binutils-gdb.orig/bfd/bfd-in2.h
> >>> +++ binutils-gdb/bfd/bfd-in2.h
> >>> @@ -2620,11 +2620,12 @@ long bfd_get_reloc_upper_bound (bfd *abf
> >>>  long bfd_canonicalize_reloc
> >>>     (bfd *abfd, asection *sec, arelent **loc, asymbol **syms);
> >>>  
> >>> -void bfd_set_reloc
> >>> +void bfd_finalize_section_relocs
> >>>     (bfd *abfd, asection *sec, arelent **rel, unsigned int count);
> >>
> >> What use is this declaration? Can't it be dropped rather than being
> >> modified? All callers ...
> >>
> >>> -#define bfd_set_reloc(abfd, asect, location, count) \
> >>> -       BFD_SEND (abfd, _bfd_set_reloc, (abfd, asect, location, count))
> >>> +#define bfd_finalize_section_relocs(abfd, asect, location, count) \
> >>> +       BFD_SEND (abfd, _bfd_finalize_section_relocs, \
> >>> +		 (abfd, asect, location, count))
> >>
> >> ... end up using this macro anyway, afaict.
> > 
> >  It's a mechanical change and not a code cleanup.  Please feel free to 
> > investigate whether the prototype is needed or not and offer a separate 
> > change if desired.  I don't think such an investigation ought to be a 
> > prerequisite for this change to be accepted.
> 
> Hmm, I can see your point, but then I also somewhat disagree. Yes, it's not
> strictly a prereq. Yet at the same time, (reasonably) obvious cleanup is
> also a good thing to happen while code is being touched anyway. Else it's
> pretty likely to never happen.

 I've glanced over this and firstly the presence of this prototype is a 
benign issue and secondly to remove it it's not an obvious cleanup at all.

 The prototype is generated as a side effect of parsing a comment block
that serves as a manual entry to document this API.  While the API is 
handled by a macro now, I think the intended data types for the macro's 
arguments and the return type still need to be documented.  The use of a 
macro rather than a function is an implementation detail (and frankly it 
should possibly be converted to a static inline function indeed), and I
find showing the interface in terms of a function prototype the right way 
to do this.

 Overall I think Jose did the right thing with the documentation part of 
the API with his commit 2318686590bd ("bfd: new BFD target entry point 
_bfd_set_reloc.") back in 2017.  Incidentally, the change was prompted by 
an issue in the MIPS backend among others and I took part in that effort.  
I completely forgot about it.

 So if you disagree with the current state, then please offer a change, 
but I refuse to do anything about something I consider right and at worst 
harmless, especially given the higher priority items on my plate, such as 
a large outstanding MIPS patch review, which has been pending for much too 
long now.  I feel like having spent too much time on this already.

 Thank you for your input.

  Maciej