> Hi Nick, > > On 27 September 2011 15:38, Nick Clifton <ni...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Any comments or objections to this patch ? If not, I will apply it > > next week. > > I've got a few objections to this patch as it stands today while I > don't object to the motivation for it. > > > +/* Get the definitions of the ARM EABI Attribute tag values. */ > > +#define BFD_ARCH_SIZE > > +#include "elf/arm.h" > > Defining BFD_ARCH_SIZE appears to be a bit of a hack. I would also > ifdef this inclusion on TARGET_AAPCS since we shouldn't really be > caring about object attributes for non AAPCS configurations.
TARGET_AAPCS doesn't exist. If you mean TARGET_AAPCS_BASED then this is a runtime expression and can't be used for preprocessor conditionals. Either way I don't think we really care. The important thing is that we only emit the .eabi_attribute directives on EABI based targets. A more important consideration is that this file does not exist. Nick: Where are you expecting elf/arm.h come from? I can't find any evidence this exists outside the binutils source tree, and that is not available when building gcc. The BFD_ARCH_SIZE hack is a fair indication that it isn't intended to be used elsewhere. Paul
