On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 5:33 PM, nickc at redhat dot com
<email address hidden> wrote:
> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12931
>
> Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Status|NEW |RESOLVED
> CC| |nickc at redhat dot com
> Resolution| |FIXED
>
> --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> 2011-06-29 16:33:44 UTC ---
> Hi Dave,
>
> Thanks for reporting this problem and providing a patch to fix it too. I
> think that 2 byte alignment should be fine for thumb-code-containing sections,
> but if someone does come up with a scenario where this assumption does not work
> then we can always fix the assembler again.
That seems reasonable -- I think the proposed fix should be a useful
interim step, since it's pretty simple and makes the situation no
worse.
Did the patch look sensible to you? I'm no gas hacker...
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 5:33 PM, nickc at redhat dot com sourceware. org/bugzilla/ show_bug. cgi?id= 12931 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------ containing sections,
<email address hidden> wrote:
> http://
>
> Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> -------
> Status|NEW |RESOLVED
> CC| |nickc at redhat dot com
> Resolution| |FIXED
>
> --- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> 2011-06-29 16:33:44 UTC ---
> Hi Dave,
>
> Thanks for reporting this problem and providing a patch to fix it too. I
> think that 2 byte alignment should be fine for thumb-code-
> but if someone does come up with a scenario where this assumption does not work
> then we can always fix the assembler again.
That seems reasonable -- I think the proposed fix should be a useful
interim step, since it's pretty simple and makes the situation no
worse.
Did the patch look sensible to you? I'm no gas hacker...
Cheers
---Dave