From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <binutils-return-91481-listarch-binutils=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 5547 invoked by alias); 30 Mar 2016 15:49:11 -0000
Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <binutils.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:binutils-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/>
List-Post: <mailto:binutils@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:binutils-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 5417 invoked by uid 89); 30 Mar 2016 15:49:08 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,CLAIM_SUBJECT,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=veneered, DEF_STUBS, def_stubs, 26329
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:49:07 +0000
Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23])	by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 168AE487;	Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:49:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.36.5.117] (vpn1-5-117.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.5.117])	by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u2UFn47n020662	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);	Wed, 30 Mar 2016 11:49:05 -0400
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH, binutils, ARM 5/9] Allow veneers to claim veneered symbols
To: Thomas Preudhomme <thomas.preudhomme@foss.arm.com>,        binutils@sourceware.org
References: <004e01d13d57$bac5a860$3050f920$@foss.arm.com> <1537478.Y6W5P8olra@e108577-lin>
From: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <56FBF56F.2080107@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:49:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1537478.Y6W5P8olra@e108577-lin>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2016-03/txt/msg00436.txt.bz2

Hi Thomas.

> @@ -2632,8 +2632,9 @@ enum elf32_arm_stub_type
>   {
>     arm_stub_none,
>     DEF_STUBS
> +  max_stub_type,
>     /* Note the first a8_veneer type.  */
> -  arm_stub_a8_veneer_lwm = arm_stub_a8_veneer_b_cond
> +  arm_stub_a8_veneer_lwm = arm_stub_a8_veneer_b_cond,
>   };

Why do you need the extra comma at the end of the enum ?

I don't like that "max_stub_type" is not actually the maximum possible
value for an elf32_arn_stub_type enum.  The name is misleading.  Maybe
you could use something like "last_non_veneer_stub".

> +  switch (stub_type)
> +    {
> +    default:
> +      return FALSE;
> +    }
> +
> +  abort ();  /* Should be unreachable.  */
> +}

I presume that your intention is to extend the switch table later on,
but there is no need for that now.  Just use:

   return FALSE;


Cheers
  Nick