On Thursday 10 November 2011 20:23:49 Graeme Russ wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Thursday 10 November 2011 17:53:06 Graeme Russ wrote: > >> Now if we use USE_PRIVATE_LIBGCC, unimplemented libgcc functions will > >> result in link errors, so using an unimplemented libgcc will be obvious > >> at build time - It may lead to a posting on the mailing list, but at > >> least we won't have latent libgcc related bugs in-the-wild. > > > > perhaps x86 should be setting PLATFORM_LIBGCC to nothing all the time. > > the funcs Gabe wants to wrap are 64bit operations. u-boot should not be > > doing 64- bit operations. that's why we have do_div(). > > Remember that there was a lot of discussion regarding the timer API that > pointed towards using 64-bit counters for all arches. We cannot take it > as gospel that 64-bit operations will never be used in U-Boot. Some people > may have a need for this as part of hardware init.
Linux has no problem doing 64bit timers without 64bit mul/div. i don't see how u-boot could possibly be more special than Linux. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
