Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
>> For now, I have:
>>
>> CFLAGS := $(LINUXINCLUDE) -g -Os -D_SETUP -D__KERNEL__ \
>> $(cflags-$(ARCH)) \
>> -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes \
>> -march=i386 -mregparm=3 \
>> -include $(srctree)/$(src)/code16gcc.h \
>> -fno-strict-aliasing -fomit-frame-pointer \
>> $(call cc-option, -ffreestanding) \
>> $(call cc-option, -fno-unit-at-a-time) \
>> $(call cc-option, -fno-toplevel-reorder) \
>> $(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector) \
>> $(call cc-option, -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2)
>>
>> ... since that will require less violence to eventually hack in the
>> proper -m16 option if/when it becomes available.
>
> Looks good, except you don't want -fno-unit-at-a-time if
> -fno-toplevel-reorder works. And of course it would be
> good to get rid of -fno-strict-aliasing, but let's not
> go there today ;-P
>
OK, how does this look:
CFLAGS := $(LINUXINCLUDE) -g -Os -D_SETUP -D__KERNEL__ \
$(cflags-$(ARCH)) \
-Wall -Wstrict-prototypes \
-march=i386 -mregparm=3 \
-include $(srctree)/$(src)/code16gcc.h \
-fno-strict-aliasing -fomit-frame-pointer \
$(call cc-option, -ffreestanding) \
$(call cc-option, -fno-toplevel-reorder,\
$(call cc-option, -fno-unit-at-a-time)) \
$(call cc-option, -fno-stack-protector) \
$(call cc-option, -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2)
I think dropping -fno-strict-aliasing for this code is probably bad...
it's pretty low-level stuff which does a lot of bitlevel manipulation.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
