Kumar Gala wrote:
On May 2, 2008, at 12:34 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
<brokenrecord>
Why don't we just link with libgcc?
</brokenrecord>
Its something of a PITA to do that in the kernel at this point since
we've duplicated libgcc functionality in it. I'm sure there are some
historical reasons this wasn't done to start with.
That's the same as saying that it would be a nice cleanup to remove all
that duplicated code now...
We'll hopefully this thread might spark either an explanation for why we
aren't just linking libgcc in a statement that says we should and we can
remove the code that implements libgcc functionality.
How would libgcc linking intermix with modules? Would we have to
EXPORT_SYMBOL() all functions that libgcc implements?
Yes, unfortunately.
A quick way to generate such a list would be to build a non-modular
kernel and leave out the libgcc link (after removing the reimplemented
functions), and see what linker errors you get.
> I'm guessing that's varies w/different gcc versions.
Yeah, but so does the set of functions that Linux needs to reimplement.
-Scott
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
