From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Randolph Chung Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] c3k panics Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 18:13:18 -0700 Message-ID: <20050530011318.GE3050@tausq.org> References: <200505290141.j4T1ffhI006449@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> <42999A30.6070602@tiscali.be> <4299F8C2.2060400@tiscali.be> Reply-To: Randolph Chung Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: John David Anglin , parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org To: Joel Soete Return-Path: In-Reply-To: <4299F8C2.2060400@tiscali.be> List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: parisc-linux-bounces@lists.parisc-linux.org > #ifndef CONFIG_64BIT > .macro fixup_branch,lbl > b \lbl > .endm > #else > .macro fixup_branch,lbl > ldil L%\lbl, %r1 > ldo R%\lbl(%r1), %r1 > bv,n %r0(%r1) > .endm > #endif These two do the same thing. The 32-bit version is simpler because we can rely on the linker to do fixups for us if the branch is too far away. The 64-bit version always uses a long branch sequence to avoid stub issues with the 64-bit toolchain. In the C code I have simply not done this (micro-)optimization. randolph -- Randolph Chung Debian GNU/Linux Developer, hppa/ia64 ports http://www.tausq.org/ _______________________________________________ parisc-linux mailing list parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux