This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Fix rs6000 compatibility predicate
- From: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- To: Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 11:25:31 +0000
- Subject: Re: Fix rs6000 compatibility predicate
- References: <vt2smlmwky0.fsf@zenia.home> <vt265i9njw7.fsf@zenia.home>
Hi Jim,
> So, is this patch rejected or accepted? If it is rejected, what
> changes should I make before resubmitting it?
Sorry - I was hoping that an RS6000 maintainer would take a look at
this one.
>> The code for bfd/cpu-rs6000.c:rs6000_compatible looks wrong to me.
>> The logic there says that A, which we assert to be a bfd_arch_rs6000,
>> is only compatible with a B whose arch is bfd_arch_powerpc and whose
>> mach is bfd_mach_rs6k. But that's an rs6000 mach, not a powerpc mach;
>> there should never be a bfd_arch_powerpc / bfd_mach_rs6k arch info.
>> Is that right?
Right.
>> The code as changed by the patch below would make more sense to me:
>> all powerpc machines are supersets of the base rs6000 machine, but
>> there the two lines diverged, so any later model of the rs6000 is
>> incompatible with any later powerpc model.
>>
>> 2003-10-21 Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
>>
>> * cpu-rs6000.c (rs6000_compatible): Check the correct arch_info
>> object's mach field: all PowerPC machines are supersets of the
>> original rs6000, but not later rs6000 machines.
Approved and applied.
Cheers
Nick