On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 02:32:46PM +, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
>> We are compiling for Coldfire CFV4E target. Binutils seems to want to
>> set the ELF header em_machine field to EM_68K with about half a dozen
>> options set to indicate instruction set and so forth.
>>
>> Should this
Assembling the following (-xexplicit):
.text
.global foobar
.proc foobar
.align 32
foobar:
{ .mmi
cmp.ne p7, p6 = 0, in1 ;;
.pred.rel.mutex p7, p6
(p7) cmp.eq p7, p9 = 0, r32
(p6) cmp.eq p6, p9 = 0, r32
} ;;
Hi Jonathan,
We are compiling for Coldfire CFV4E target. Binutils seems to want to
set the ELF header em_machine field to EM_68K with about half a dozen
options set to indicate instruction set and so forth.
Should this be getting set to EM_COLDFIRE, or is the existing behavior
correct?
I thin
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2008-01-31 10:48
---
Hi Paul,
I still cannot reproduce this bug, but there is no good reason why we should
not check the return value of get_elf_backend_data() so I am going to apply the
uploaded variant of your patch.
Cheers
Nic
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2008-01-31 10:45
---
Created an attachment (id=)
--> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=&action=view)
ENsure that the elf backend data was obtained before using it.
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bu
