Re: [PATCH]: HC11 linker relax fixes (potential pb on other relax targets)

[Stephane Carrez <stcarrez@nerim.fr>]

Hi!

Alan Modra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 11:19:41PM +0200, Stephane Carrez wrote:
> 
>>  - when we adjust the symbols after removing bytes, we must take into
>>    account the symbol that marks the end of the section.  The test that 
>>    exists
>>    in the bfd relax targets (and that I copied!) is:
>>
>>       if (isym->st_shndx == sec_shndx
>> 	  && isym->st_value > addr
>>	  && isym->st_value < toaddr)
>>
>>    and it is not correct if there is a section that defines a label at its 
>>    very end.
>>    It will not be adjusted.
> 
> 
> I wonder why there is any test of symbol value against "toaddr"?  It
> seems to me that this test is bogus, and your replacement of "< toaddr"
> with "<= toaddr" just fixes one particular symbol value.  For instance,
> suppose we have
> 
>  .text
>  nop
>  nop
> sym1:
> sym2 = sym1 + 2
> 
> and the relax pass decides to delete one of the nops.  Shouldn't sym2
> be decremented?  Of course, you could argue that
> 
> sym3 = .text + 4
> 
> might be better left alone, but that just demonstrates the fragility
> of adjusting symbols based on their value.
> 

I agree.  I don't know the rationale for the toaddr test.
At least you give me one to remove it.

	Stephane