On Tuesday 11 October 2022 19:07:55 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Tuesday 11 October 2022 15:33:59 Nick Clifton wrote: > > Hi Pali, Hi Richard, > > > > > Having file name and line number would be also useful as it took me > > > some time to figure out where is the issue... > > > > Right - I have tried a little harder and come up with a follow up patch. > > This is now checked in, and given an input file that looks like this: > > > > % cat t.s > > kernoff: > > .set KERNEL_OFFSET, 0x40000 > > .set CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE, 0x80008000 > > .word 44 > > .word KERNEL_OFFSET - (. - CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE) > > .word - (. - 0x80008000) > > .word 0x40000 - (. - 0x0) > > > > The assembler now produces the following output: > > > > t.s: Assembler messages: > > t.s:5: Error: expression is too complex to be resolved or converted into > > relocations > > t.s:6: Error: expression is too complex to be resolved or converted into > > relocations > > > > Note - some targets do support applying multiple relocations to a > > single address, but even then there can be expressions that cannot > > be resolved this way. That is why the error message refers to > > "converted into relocations" rather than just "converted into a > > relocation". > > > > Cheers > > Nick > > > > Nice! > > Anyway, what should I use in code? > > .word . - CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE - KERNEL_OFFSET > > or > > .word CONFIG_SYS_TEXT_BASE + KERNEL_OFFSET - . > > And can you guarantee that one of those form would work also in future > gcc/binutils versions, and it is not something version specific or > undocumented?
Hello Nick, could you clarify which option should I use? And could you extend documentation about Dot symbol usage, what is supported, what not, to make it clear? https://sourceware.org/binutils/docs/as/Dot.html
