On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 05:42:27PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Scott Wood, > > In message <4a5f4913.5030...@freescale.com> you wrote: > > > > So how do you propose that illegal divide operations be reported to the > > application? > > In the same way as Linux is doing it (i. e. usually nothing at all) ?
Yay bugs. > > What is so unreasonable about having a function to print a message and > > dump registers? > > We didn't need one for the so far. What exactly do we need it for now? For the same reason we have cpu/*/traps.c. > > You could even make it a weak symbol that stays at NULL, so any attempt > > to call it will trap that way (assuming NULL pointers are trapped in > > U-Boot on that architecture...). > > As you know, they are not. If you're happy with not making it debuggable, then there's no need to trap on the NULL -- just make sure it never happens. :-) I'd much rather spend the handful of bytes on at least a __builtin_trap(), though. Or do compiler implementation specific things such as reimplementing libgcc functions or carefully avoiding generating calls to them, if you prefer. Whatever. -Scott _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
