sparc32: Be less strict in matching %lo part of relocation.
The "(insn & 0x01800000) != 0x01800000" test matches 'restore' but that is a legitimate place to see the %lo() part of a 32-bit symbol relocation, particularly in tail calls. Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Tested-by: Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
dbf2b92d54
commit
b1f44e13a5
|
@ -302,8 +302,7 @@ void __init btfixup(void)
|
|||
case 'i': /* INT */
|
||||
if ((insn & 0xc1c00000) == 0x01000000) /* %HI */
|
||||
set_addr(addr, q[1], fmangled, (insn & 0xffc00000) | (p[1] >> 10));
|
||||
else if ((insn & 0x80002000) == 0x80002000 &&
|
||||
(insn & 0x01800000) != 0x01800000) /* %LO */
|
||||
else if ((insn & 0x80002000) == 0x80002000) /* %LO */
|
||||
set_addr(addr, q[1], fmangled, (insn & 0xffffe000) | (p[1] & 0x3ff));
|
||||
else {
|
||||
prom_printf(insn_i, p, addr, insn);
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue