On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 09:59:12AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2013-08-27 at 16:42 +0930, Alan Modra wrote: > > The proper fix is to define a whole slew of new relocations and reloc > > specifiers, and modify everything to use them, but that seems like too > > much bother. I had ideas once upon a time to implement gas and ld > > options that makes @ha and _HA report overflows, but haven't found one > > of those round tuits. > > No, if you don't have a reloc that can represent this, then the proper > fix is to use the existing relocs to load the original symbol address > into a register, then *generate* the appropriate 64-bit addition on top > of it.
I already have a gcc fix to do exactly that. My "proper fix" comment was more to do with the general case. For example, when linking a huge object that overflows _HA relocs right now we silently generate bad code. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
