Thanks for the reviews, Segher, Alan, Alan Modra <amo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 05:39:51PM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 10:13:16PM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote: >>> For 32bit cases this isn't a problem since we can load/store to unaligned >>> addresses using D-mode insns. >> >> Can you? -m32 -mpowerpc64? We did have a bug with this before, maybe >> six years ago or so... Alan, do you remember? It required some assembler >> work IIRC. > > Yes, the ppc32 ABI doesn't have the relocs to support DS fields. > Rather than defining a whole series of _DS (and _DQ!) relocs, the > linker inspects the instruction being relocated and complains if the > relocation would modify opcode bits. See is_insn_ds_form in > bfd/elf32-ppc.c. We do the same on ppc64 for DQ field insns. Ah, that makes a lot of sense - and ld64 also makes this check (for the same underlying reason, I am sure - we are short of reloc space anyway in Mach-O). >> I'll have another looke through this (esp. the generic part) when I'm fresh >> awake (but not before coffee!). Alan, can you have a look as well please? > > It looks reasonable to me. So, OK for trunk? (and backports after some bake time)? thanks Iain
