From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-39255-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 14881 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2005 16:37:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 14836 invoked from network); 30 Mar 2005 16:37:30 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com) (193.131.176.58)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 30 Mar 2005 16:37:30 -0000
Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (pc960.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.205.4])
	by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j2UGbC4G027382;
	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:37:12 +0100 (BST)
Received: from pc960.cambridge.arm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j2UGbQIF009656;
	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:37:26 +0100
Received: (from rearnsha@localhost)
	by pc960.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id j2UGbQTl009651;
	Wed, 30 Mar 2005 17:37:26 +0100
X-Authentication-Warning: pc960.cambridge.arm.com: rearnsha set sender to rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org using -f
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix type and alignment of ARM/Thumb EABI
	mapping	symbols
From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@gcc.gnu.org>
To: Julian Brown <julian@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>, binutils@sources.redhat.com
In-Reply-To: <424AD518.9000101@codesourcery.com>
References: <424716CD.5030909@codesourcery.com>
	 <4249C7E9.8000100@codesourcery.com>
	 <1112175967.12337.36.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
	 <200503301527.50626.paul@codesourcery.com>
	 <424AC63F.7000706@codesourcery.com>
	 <1112200206.1680.6.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
	 <424AD518.9000101@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: GNU
Message-Id: <1112200646.1680.9.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:58:00 -0000
X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00905.txt.bz2

On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 17:34, Julian Brown wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 16:31, Julian Brown wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>   * bfd/cpu-arm.c (bfd_elf32_is_arm_mapping_symbol_name): ...to here,
> >>   renamed and made global.
> > 
> > 
> > This function isn't elf specific, which is one of the reasons I
> > suggested moving it to cpu-arm.c.  So why have you put elf32 in the
> > name?
> 
> Doh, sorry. I was confused by the mapping symbols being defined by the 
> AAELF spec, and didn't realise they would be used elsewhere too.
> 
True, but we don't define a coff spec.  However, I suspect that if we
did, we'd probably put mapping symbols in there too.

> Is the original name best, or would bfd_is_arm_mapping_symbol_name be 
> better?
> 

bfd_is_arm_mapping_symbol_name is fine.

R.