/* BFD support for the ns32k architecture.
- Copyright 1990, 1991, 1994, 1995, 1998, 2000, 2001
- Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+ Copyright 1990, 1991, 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003,
+ 2004, 2005, 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Almost totally rewritten by Ian Dall from initial work
by Andrew Cagney.
-This file is part of BFD, the Binary File Descriptor library.
+ This file is part of BFD, the Binary File Descriptor library.
-This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
-it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
-the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
-(at your option) any later version.
+ This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+ it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+ the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or
+ (at your option) any later version.
-This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
-but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
-MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
-GNU General Public License for more details.
+ This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
+ GNU General Public License for more details.
-You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
-along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
-Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA. */
+ You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+ along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
+ Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street - Fifth Floor, Boston,
+ MA 02110-1301, USA. */
-#include "bfd.h"
#include "sysdep.h"
+#include "bfd.h"
#include "libbfd.h"
#include "ns32k.h"
static const bfd_arch_info_type arch_info_struct[] =
{
- N(32532,"ns32k:32532",true, 0), /* the word ns32k will match this too */
+ N(32532,"ns32k:32532",TRUE, 0), /* The word ns32k will match this too. */
};
const bfd_arch_info_type bfd_ns32k_arch =
- N(32032,"ns32k:32032",false, &arch_info_struct[0]);
+ N(32032,"ns32k:32032",FALSE, &arch_info_struct[0]);
static bfd_reloc_status_type do_ns32k_reloc
- PARAMS ((bfd *, arelent *, struct symbol_cache_entry *, PTR, asection *,
+ PARAMS ((bfd *, arelent *, struct bfd_symbol *, PTR, asection *,
bfd *, char **,
bfd_vma (*) (bfd_byte *, int),
- int (*) (bfd_vma, bfd_byte *, int)));
+ void (*) (bfd_vma, bfd_byte *, int)));
bfd_vma
_bfd_ns32k_get_displacement (buffer, size)
int size;
{
bfd_signed_vma value;
+
switch (size)
{
case 1:
abort ();
return 0;
}
+
return value;
}
-int
+void
_bfd_ns32k_put_displacement (value, buffer, size)
bfd_vma value;
bfd_byte *buffer;
switch (size)
{
case 1:
- if (value + 0x40 > 0x7f)
- return -1;
value &= 0x7f;
*buffer++ = value;
break;
case 2:
- if (value + 0x2000 > 0x3fff)
- return -1;
value &= 0x3fff;
value |= 0x8000;
*buffer++ = (value >> 8);
break;
case 4:
- /* FIXME: is this correct? -0x1f000000 <= value < 0x2000000 */
- if (value + 0x1f000000 > 0x3effffff)
- return -1;
value |= (bfd_vma) 0xc0000000;
*buffer++ = (value >> 24);
*buffer++ = (value >> 16);
*buffer++ = (value >> 8);
*buffer++ = value;
break;
- default:
- return -1;
}
- return 0;
+ return;
}
bfd_vma
int size;
{
bfd_vma value = 0;
+
switch (size)
{
- case 8:
- value = (value << 8) | (*buffer++ & 0xff);
- value = (value << 8) | (*buffer++ & 0xff);
- value = (value << 8) | (*buffer++ & 0xff);
- value = (value << 8) | (*buffer++ & 0xff);
case 4:
value = (value << 8) | (*buffer++ & 0xff);
value = (value << 8) | (*buffer++ & 0xff);
value = (value << 8) | (*buffer++ & 0xff);
case 1:
value = (value << 8) | (*buffer++ & 0xff);
+ break;
+ default:
+ abort ();
}
return value;
}
-int
+void
_bfd_ns32k_put_immediate (value, buffer, size)
bfd_vma value;
bfd_byte *buffer;
buffer += size - 1;
switch (size)
{
- case 8:
- *buffer-- = (value & 0xff); value >>= 8;
- *buffer-- = (value & 0xff); value >>= 8;
- *buffer-- = (value & 0xff); value >>= 8;
- *buffer-- = (value & 0xff); value >>= 8;
case 4:
*buffer-- = (value & 0xff); value >>= 8;
*buffer-- = (value & 0xff); value >>= 8;
case 1:
*buffer-- = (value & 0xff); value >>= 8;
}
- return 0;
}
/* This is just like the standard perform_relocation except we
- * use get_data and put_data which know about the ns32k
- * storage methods.
- * This is probably a lot more complicated than it needs to be!
- */
+ use get_data and put_data which know about the ns32k storage
+ methods. This is probably a lot more complicated than it
+ needs to be! */
+
static bfd_reloc_status_type
do_ns32k_reloc (abfd, reloc_entry, symbol, data, input_section, output_bfd,
error_message, get_data, put_data)
bfd *abfd;
arelent *reloc_entry;
- struct symbol_cache_entry *symbol;
+ struct bfd_symbol *symbol;
PTR data;
asection *input_section;
bfd *output_bfd;
char **error_message ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED;
bfd_vma (*get_data) PARAMS ((bfd_byte *, int));
- int (*put_data) PARAMS ((bfd_vma, bfd_byte *, int));
+ void (*put_data) PARAMS ((bfd_vma, bfd_byte *, int));
{
int overflow = 0;
bfd_vma relocation;
return bfd_reloc_ok;
}
- /* If we are not producing relocateable output, return an error if
+ /* If we are not producing relocatable output, return an error if
the symbol is not defined. An undefined weak symbol is
considered to have a value of zero (SVR4 ABI, p. 4-27). */
if (symbol->section == &bfd_und_section
flag = bfd_reloc_undefined;
/* Is the address of the relocation really within the section? */
- if (reloc_entry->address > input_section->_cooked_size)
+ if (reloc_entry->address > bfd_get_section_limit (abfd, input_section))
return bfd_reloc_outofrange;
- /* Work out which section the relocation is targetted at and the
+ /* Work out which section the relocation is targeted at and the
initial relocation command value. */
/* Get symbol value. (Common symbols are special.) */
reloc_target_output_section = symbol->section->output_section;
/* Convert input-section-relative symbol value to absolute. */
- if (output_bfd && howto->partial_inplace == false)
+ if (output_bfd != NULL && ! howto->partial_inplace)
output_base = 0;
else
output_base = reloc_target_output_section->vma;
/* Here the variable relocation holds the final address of the
symbol we are relocating against, plus any addend. */
- if (howto->pc_relative == true)
+ if (howto->pc_relative)
{
/* This is a PC relative relocation. We want to set RELOCATION
to the distance between the address of the symbol and the
of the location within the section. Some targets arrange for
the addend to be the negative of the position of the location
within the section; for example, i386-aout does this. For
- i386-aout, pcrel_offset is false. Some other targets do not
+ i386-aout, pcrel_offset is FALSE. Some other targets do not
include the position of the location; for example, m88kbcs,
- or ELF. For those targets, pcrel_offset is true.
+ or ELF. For those targets, pcrel_offset is TRUE.
- If we are producing relocateable output, then we must ensure
+ If we are producing relocatable output, then we must ensure
that this reloc will be correctly computed when the final
- relocation is done. If pcrel_offset is false we want to wind
+ relocation is done. If pcrel_offset is FALSE we want to wind
up with the negative of the location within the section,
which means we must adjust the existing addend by the change
- in the location within the section. If pcrel_offset is true
+ in the location within the section. If pcrel_offset is TRUE
we do not want to adjust the existing addend at all.
FIXME: This seems logical to me, but for the case of
- producing relocateable output it is not what the code
+ producing relocatable output it is not what the code
actually does. I don't want to change it, because it seems
far too likely that something will break. */
-
relocation -=
input_section->output_section->vma + input_section->output_offset;
- if (howto->pcrel_offset == true)
+ if (howto->pcrel_offset)
relocation -= reloc_entry->address;
}
if (output_bfd != (bfd *) NULL)
{
- if (howto->partial_inplace == false)
+ if (! howto->partial_inplace)
{
/* This is a partial relocation, and we want to apply the relocation
to the reloc entry rather than the raw data. Modify the reloc
/* WTF?? */
if (abfd->xvec->flavour == bfd_target_coff_flavour)
{
-#if 1
/* For m68k-coff, the addend was being subtracted twice during
relocation with -r. Removing the line below this comment
fixes that problem; see PR 2953.
-However, Ian wrote the following, regarding removing the line below,
-which explains why it is still enabled: --djm
-
-If you put a patch like that into BFD you need to check all the COFF
-linkers. I am fairly certain that patch will break coff-i386 (e.g.,
-SCO); see coff_i386_reloc in coff-i386.c where I worked around the
-problem in a different way. There may very well be a reason that the
-code works as it does.
-
-Hmmm. The first obvious point is that bfd_perform_relocation should
-not have any tests that depend upon the flavour. It's seem like
-entirely the wrong place for such a thing. The second obvious point
-is that the current code ignores the reloc addend when producing
-relocateable output for COFF. That's peculiar. In fact, I really
-have no idea what the point of the line you want to remove is.
-
-A typical COFF reloc subtracts the old value of the symbol and adds in
-the new value to the location in the object file (if it's a pc
-relative reloc it adds the difference between the symbol value and the
-location). When relocating we need to preserve that property.
-
-BFD handles this by setting the addend to the negative of the old
-value of the symbol. Unfortunately it handles common symbols in a
-non-standard way (it doesn't subtract the old value) but that's a
-different story (we can't change it without losing backward
-compatibility with old object files) (coff-i386 does subtract the old
-value, to be compatible with existing coff-i386 targets, like SCO).
-
-So everything works fine when not producing relocateable output. When
-we are producing relocateable output, logically we should do exactly
-what we do when not producing relocateable output. Therefore, your
-patch is correct. In fact, it should probably always just set
-reloc_entry->addend to 0 for all cases, since it is, in fact, going to
-add the value into the object file. This won't hurt the COFF code,
-which doesn't use the addend; I'm not sure what it will do to other
-formats (the thing to check for would be whether any formats both use
-the addend and set partial_inplace).
-
-When I wanted to make coff-i386 produce relocateable output, I ran
-into the problem that you are running into: I wanted to remove that
-line. Rather than risk it, I made the coff-i386 relocs use a special
-function; it's coff_i386_reloc in coff-i386.c. The function
-specifically adds the addend field into the object file, knowing that
-bfd_perform_relocation is not going to. If you remove that line, then
-coff-i386.c will wind up adding the addend field in twice. It's
-trivial to fix; it just needs to be done.
-
-The problem with removing the line is just that it may break some
-working code. With BFD it's hard to be sure of anything. The right
-way to deal with this is simply to build and test at least all the
-supported COFF targets. It should be straightforward if time and disk
-space consuming. For each target:
- 1) build the linker
- 2) generate some executable, and link it using -r (I would
- probably use paranoia.o and link against newlib/libc.a, which
- for all the supported targets would be available in
- /usr/cygnus/progressive/H-host/target/lib/libc.a).
- 3) make the change to reloc.c
- 4) rebuild the linker
- 5) repeat step 2
- 6) if the resulting object files are the same, you have at least
- made it no worse
- 7) if they are different you have to figure out which version is
- right
-*/
+ However, Ian wrote the following, regarding removing the line
+ below, which explains why it is still enabled: --djm
+
+ If you put a patch like that into BFD you need to check all
+ the COFF linkers. I am fairly certain that patch will break
+ coff-i386 (e.g., SCO); see coff_i386_reloc in coff-i386.c
+ where I worked around the problem in a different way. There
+ may very well be a reason that the code works as it does.
+
+ Hmmm. The first obvious point is that bfd_perform_relocation
+ should not have any tests that depend upon the flavour. It's
+ seem like entirely the wrong place for such a thing. The
+ second obvious point is that the current code ignores the
+ reloc addend when producing relocatable output for COFF.
+ That's peculiar. In fact, I really have no idea what the
+ point of the line you want to remove is.
+
+ A typical COFF reloc subtracts the old value of the symbol
+ and adds in the new value to the location in the object file
+ (if it's a pc relative reloc it adds the difference between
+ the symbol value and the location). When relocating we need
+ to preserve that property.
+
+ BFD handles this by setting the addend to the negative of the
+ old value of the symbol. Unfortunately it handles common
+ symbols in a non-standard way (it doesn't subtract the old
+ value) but that's a different story (we can't change it
+ without losing backward compatibility with old object files)
+ (coff-i386 does subtract the old value, to be compatible with
+ existing coff-i386 targets, like SCO).
+
+ So everything works fine when not producing relocatable
+ output. When we are producing relocatable output, logically
+ we should do exactly what we do when not producing
+ relocatable output. Therefore, your patch is correct. In
+ fact, it should probably always just set reloc_entry->addend
+ to 0 for all cases, since it is, in fact, going to add the
+ value into the object file. This won't hurt the COFF code,
+ which doesn't use the addend; I'm not sure what it will do
+ to other formats (the thing to check for would be whether
+ any formats both use the addend and set partial_inplace).
+
+ When I wanted to make coff-i386 produce relocatable output,
+ I ran into the problem that you are running into: I wanted
+ to remove that line. Rather than risk it, I made the
+ coff-i386 relocs use a special function; it's coff_i386_reloc
+ in coff-i386.c. The function specifically adds the addend
+ field into the object file, knowing that bfd_perform_relocation
+ is not going to. If you remove that line, then coff-i386.c
+ will wind up adding the addend field in twice. It's trivial
+ to fix; it just needs to be done.
+
+ The problem with removing the line is just that it may break
+ some working code. With BFD it's hard to be sure of anything.
+ The right way to deal with this is simply to build and test at
+ least all the supported COFF targets. It should be
+ straightforward if time and disk space consuming. For each
+ target:
+ 1) build the linker
+ 2) generate some executable, and link it using -r (I would
+ probably use paranoia.o and link against newlib/libc.a,
+ which for all the supported targets would be available in
+ /usr/cygnus/progressive/H-host/target/lib/libc.a).
+ 3) make the change to reloc.c
+ 4) rebuild the linker
+ 5) repeat step 2
+ 6) if the resulting object files are the same, you have at
+ least made it no worse
+ 7) if they are different you have to figure out which
+ version is right. */
relocation -= reloc_entry->addend;
-#endif
reloc_entry->addend = 0;
}
else
}
}
- /*
- Either we are relocating all the way, or we don't want to apply
- the relocation to the reloc entry (probably because there isn't
- any room in the output format to describe addends to relocs)
- */
+ /* Either we are relocating all the way, or we don't want to apply
+ the relocation to the reloc entry (probably because there isn't
+ any room in the output format to describe addends to relocs). */
/* The cast to bfd_vma avoids a bug in the Alpha OSF/1 C compiler
(OSF version 1.3, compiler version 3.11). It miscompiles the
relocation >>= (bfd_vma) howto->rightshift;
- /* Shift everything up to where it's going to be used */
-
+ /* Shift everything up to where it's going to be used. */
relocation <<= (bfd_vma) howto->bitpos;
- /* Wait for the day when all have the mask in them */
+ /* Wait for the day when all have the mask in them. */
/* What we do:
i instruction to be left alone
B B B B B
or A A A A A
-----------------------
- R R R R R R R R R R put into bfd_put<size>
- */
+ R R R R R R R R R R put into bfd_put<size>. */
#define DOIT(x) \
x = ( (x & ~howto->dst_mask) | (((x & howto->src_mask) + relocation) & howto->dst_mask))
{
case 0:
{
- char x = get_data (location, 1);
+ bfd_vma x = get_data (location, 1);
DOIT (x);
- overflow = put_data ((bfd_vma) x, location, 1);
+ put_data ((bfd_vma) x, location, 1);
}
break;
case 1:
if (relocation)
{
- short x = get_data (location, 2);
+ bfd_vma x = get_data (location, 2);
DOIT (x);
- overflow = put_data ((bfd_vma) x, location, 2);
+ put_data ((bfd_vma) x, location, 2);
}
break;
case 2:
if (relocation)
{
- long x = get_data (location, 4);
+ bfd_vma x = get_data (location, 4);
DOIT (x);
- overflow = put_data ((bfd_vma) x, location, 4);
+ put_data ((bfd_vma) x, location, 4);
}
break;
case -2:
{
- long x = get_data (location, 4);
+ bfd_vma x = get_data (location, 4);
relocation = -relocation;
DOIT(x);
- overflow = put_data ((bfd_vma) x, location, 4);
+ put_data ((bfd_vma) x, location, 4);
}
break;
case 3:
- /* Do nothing */
+ /* Do nothing. */
break;
case 4:
{
bfd_vma x = get_data (location, 8);
DOIT (x);
- overflow = put_data (x, location, 8);
+ put_data (x, location, 8);
}
#else
abort ();
bfd_vma relocation;
bfd_byte *location;
bfd_vma (*get_data) PARAMS ((bfd_byte *, int));
- int (*put_data) PARAMS ((bfd_vma, bfd_byte *, int));
+ void (*put_data) PARAMS ((bfd_vma, bfd_byte *, int));
{
int size;
bfd_vma x;
- boolean overflow;
+ bfd_boolean overflow;
/* If the size is negative, negate RELOCATION. This isn't very
general. */
which we don't check for. We must either check at every single
operation, which would be tedious, or we must do the computations
in a type larger than bfd_vma, which would be inefficient. */
- overflow = false;
+ overflow = FALSE;
if (howto->complain_on_overflow != complain_overflow_dont)
{
bfd_vma check;
/* For the signed case we use ADD, rather than SIGNED_ADD,
to avoid warnings from SVR4 cc. This is OK since we
- explictly handle the sign bits. */
+ explicitly handle the sign bits. */
if (signed_add >= 0)
signed_check += add >> howto->bitpos;
else
if (signed_check > reloc_signed_max
|| signed_check < reloc_signed_min)
- overflow = true;
+ overflow = TRUE;
}
break;
case complain_overflow_unsigned:
(((1 << (howto->bitsize - 1)) - 1) << 1) | 1;
if (check > reloc_unsigned_max)
- overflow = true;
+ overflow = TRUE;
}
break;
case complain_overflow_bitfield:
if ((check & ~reloc_bits) != 0
&& (((bfd_vma) signed_check & ~reloc_bits)
!= (-(bfd_vma) 1 & ~reloc_bits)))
- overflow = true;
+ overflow = TRUE;
}
break;
default:
output_bfd, error_message)
bfd *abfd;
arelent *reloc_entry;
- struct symbol_cache_entry *symbol;
+ struct bfd_symbol *symbol;
PTR data;
asection *input_section;
bfd *output_bfd;
output_bfd, error_message)
bfd *abfd;
arelent *reloc_entry;
- struct symbol_cache_entry *symbol;
+ struct bfd_symbol *symbol;
PTR data;
asection *input_section;
bfd *output_bfd;
bfd_vma relocation;
/* Sanity check the address. */
- if (address > input_section->_cooked_size)
+ if (address > bfd_get_section_limit (input_bfd, input_section))
return bfd_reloc_outofrange;
/* This function assumes that we are dealing with a basic relocation
location we are relocating. Some targets (e.g., i386-aout)
arrange for the contents of the section to be the negative of the
offset of the location within the section; for such targets
- pcrel_offset is false. Other targets (e.g., m88kbcs or ELF)
+ pcrel_offset is FALSE. Other targets (e.g., m88kbcs or ELF)
simply leave the contents of the section as zero; for such
- targets pcrel_offset is true. If pcrel_offset is false we do not
+ targets pcrel_offset is TRUE. If pcrel_offset is FALSE we do not
need to subtract out the offset of the location within the
section (which is just ADDRESS). */
if (howto->pc_relative)
OSDN Git Service
