From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:18:38 +0100 (BST) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([IPv6:::ffff:64.233.162.205]:20654 "EHLO zproxy.gmail.com") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:18:21 +0100 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 14so1383568nzn for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 02:20:05 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=kJezhNdbiNJTXfvF6AvuJMv/yd2rJfzheZLKMMkiclJ/5oEgBzjTIxrc085L7cLkRCsCMr0XchL4LHkiiY48bKXHZ60W6Wltm/JoiTp/DC+olufnnWP0T5pKwEVrAmpPefV3F4WbjqFom87nB4z7JciOHtDA5WN71PsXHAuDZ4A= Received: by 10.36.132.20 with SMTP id f20mr13550nzd; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 02:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.47.11 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 02:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:49:40 +0530 From: Kishore K Reply-To: Kishore K To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" Subject: Re: bal instruction in gcc 3.x Cc: Pete Popov , Ralf Baechle , "linux-mips@linux-mips.org" In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20050719164427.GB8758@linux-mips.org> <1121802786.7285.88.camel@localhost.localdomain> Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 8573 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: hellokishore@gmail.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On 7/20/05, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, Pete Popov wrote: > > > Try the attached patch instead. > > Apart from other changes why not simply s/bal/jal/? Your proposed code > is bad if ever to be built to a 64-bit object. > In the case of s/bal/jal, I get the warning "No .cprestore pseudo-op used in PIC code". Is it safe to ignore this warning ? On the other hand, if I replace bal jump_to_label by la t9, jump_to_label jalr t9 I don't see any warning. What could be the reason ? Can you suggest, what should be done to make the code safe for building on 64 bit processor. --kishore