Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 Sep 2006 02:47:42 +0200 (CEST) | From | Roman Zippel <> | Subject | Re: [2.6 patch] re-add -ffreestanding |
| |
Hi,
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > BS, even without it gcc can't make such assumption. > > There is not a single optimization, which would be invalid in a kernel > > environment and would be "fixed" by this option, so please stop this > > nonsense. > > You are wrong. > > Section 5.1.2.2.2 of ISO/IEC 9899:1999 says: > In a hosted environment, a program may use all functions, macros, type > definitions, and objects described in the library clause (clause 7). > > Since a hosted environment means gcc+libc, it's therefore clear that gcc > can assume the presence of a full libc if gcc isn't told that it's used > as a freestanding environment.
Define "full libc". Explain what exactly -ffreestanding fixes, which is not valid for the kernel.
byem Roman - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |