[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Unnecessary Relocation Hiding?
    Sorry for perhaps extending the specific question to a more generic
    one. In which cases shall we, in current or future development,
    prevent gcc from knowing a pointer-addition in the way RELOC_HIDE? And
    in what cases shall we just write pure C point addition?

    After all, we are writing an OS in C not in pure assembly, so I am
    just trying to learn some generial rules to mimize the raw assembly in


    2006/8/25, Paul Mackerras <>:
    > Christoph Lameter writes:
    > No, RELOC_HIDE came from ppc originally. The reason for it is that
    > gcc assumes that if you add something on to the address of a symbol,
    > the resulting address is still inside the bounds of the symbol, and do
    > optimizations based on that. The RELOC_HIDE macro is designed to
    > prevent gcc knowing that the resulting pointer is obtained by adding
    > an offset to the address of a symbol. As far as gcc knows, the
    > resulting pointer could point to anything.
    > It has nothing to do with linker relocations.
    > Paul.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-08-25 03:35    [W:0.022 / U:186.620 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site