[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20060822111835.GU11651@stusta.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 13:18:35 +0200
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] re-add -ffreestanding
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 12:37:13PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 23:37:31 -0400
> Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 21, 2006, at 19:13:20, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >> What's the problem with adding -ffreestanding and stating
> > >> explicitely which functions we want to be handled be builtins, and
> > >> which functions we don't want to be handled by builtins?
> > >
> > > Take a look at lib/string.c and think about it a bit.
> >
> > So why can't lib/string.c explicitly say __builtin_foo() instead of
> > foo() where we mean the former?
>
> Because gcc when using builtins sometimes decides to call the
> out of line version (usually when it can't figure out the alignment
> and generic alignment code would be too large to inline). And it will
> always call str/memfoo not __builtin_str/memfoo
IOW, we might in some cases require an out-of-line version of the
function?
I don't see in this case any problem created by using -ffreestanding and
the #define's.
> -Andi
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists