Re: Changes to PPC Linux required for GCC 3.1

[Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com>]

On Wednesday 05 December 2001 20:45, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 06:50:38PM +0100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > >I think the reason this wasn't applied is that Paul said something about
> > >thiws being horriyingly ugly.  Corey, can you post a patch that changes
> > >RELOC(x) into a function and nothing else? :)
> >
> > I prefer this beeing resolved at compile time. The reason Paul didn't
> > want it at first is because he didn't want a workaround for a pre-release
> > gcc bug. Since this is becoming a "feature", it makes sense to get the
> > workaround. Paulus will confirm or not what I'm saying though...
>
> This was actually being hit by a 3.0.x release at the time I think (and
> we worked around it another way).  I'd prefer a clean function over an
> ugly macro any day :)

I don't understand how my patch makes the RELOC hack uglier than it is
already by itself ;-). The few affected files should really be reworked to be
compiled with something like -fPIC -mrelocateable (maybe with -msdata and
setup r12 accordingly).

Franz.

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/