From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:22:48 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.spb.artcoms.ru ([IPv6:::ffff:82.114.120.253]:16035 "EHLO mrelay.spb.artcoms.ru") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:22:32 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mrelay.spb.artcoms.ru (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ADA9132F7; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:24:22 +0400 (MSD) Received: from mrelay.spb.artcoms.ru ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (megera.artcoms.ru [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 00833-10; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:24:22 +0400 (MSD) Received: from ALEC (unknown [192.168.249.108]) by mrelay.spb.artcoms.ru (Postfix) with SMTP id 2E612132EF; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:24:22 +0400 (MSD) Message-ID: <012b01c58d2e$54a18250$6cf9a8c0@ALEC> Reply-To: "Alexander Voropay" From: "Alexander Voropay" To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: References: <20050719164427.GB8758@linux-mips.org> <1121802786.7285.88.camel@localhost.localdomain> <010901c58d28$15e2a3b0$6cf9a8c0@ALEC> Subject: Re: bal instruction in gcc 3.x Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:24:15 +0400 Organization: Art Communications MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="ISO-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at spb.artcoms.ru Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 8579 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: alec@artcoms.ru Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips "Maciej W. Rozycki" wrote: > There were discussions as to whether reuse R_MIPS_PC16 for > branches or not. Unfortunately I don't remember the conclusion -- you'd > have to find it out yourself. http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2003-02/msg00447.html (follow thread) Seems, binutils people have removed this in more recent binutils versions. MIPS SDE is more conservative there. -- -=AV=- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <012b01c58d2e$54a18250$6cf9a8c0@ALEC> Reply-To: "Alexander Voropay" From: "Alexander Voropay" References: <20050719164427.GB8758@linux-mips.org> <1121802786.7285.88.camel@localhost.localdomain> <010901c58d28$15e2a3b0$6cf9a8c0@ALEC> Subject: Re: bal instruction in gcc 3.x Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:24:15 +0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="ISO-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org Message-ID: <20050720132415.kZEKJ2Ipv34l1hqvWBUI6MuT2_xMH-MhS6bkP6kKLAk@z> "Maciej W. Rozycki" wrote: > There were discussions as to whether reuse R_MIPS_PC16 for > branches or not. Unfortunately I don't remember the conclusion -- you'd > have to find it out yourself. http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2003-02/msg00447.html (follow thread) Seems, binutils people have removed this in more recent binutils versions. MIPS SDE is more conservative there. -- -=AV=-