Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Aug 2006 13:18:35 +0200 | From | Adrian Bunk <> | 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@mac.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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |