https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26395
--- Comment #12 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> --- (In reply to Joel Sherrill from comment #11) > I can't say whether you are right or wrong on rejecting that assembly > language but it looks like this started as something generated by GCC like > our case. If gcc still generates that assembly statement, then it has some > place that needs fixing as well. Agreed. I am a little bit skeptical that the test Alex provided in comment #7 actually came from compilation by a compiler, since the offending expression is ":lo12<constant>" rather than ":lo12<symbol>". I would expect a compiler to resolve ":lo12<constant>" on its own and not need the assembler to step in. But, if this is compiler generated code, then maybe I do need to find a way for the assembler to handle it properly. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
