From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 08:01:13 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Kaoru Fukui Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org, Momchil Velikov , hozer@drgw.net, geert@linux-m68k.org Subject: Re: Broken asm/div64.h macro Message-ID: <20020129150113.GC25973@opus.bloom.county> References: <20020129003720.GA25973@opus.bloom.county> <200201290508.OAA07699@mail.highway.ne.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200201290508.OAA07699@mail.highway.ne.jp> Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 02:05:28PM +0900, Kaoru Fukui wrote: > On 28 Jan, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:45:31PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Tom Rini wrote: > >> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 10:16:28AM +0200, Momchil Velikov wrote: > >> > > >>>>> "Kaoru" == Kaoru Fukui writes: > >> > > > >> > > Kaoru> On 27 Jan, Troy Benjegerdes wrote: > >> > > >> Did you actually try compiling PPC this way?? > >> > > >> > >> > > >> vsprintf.o(.text+0x494): undefined reference to `__umoddi3' > >> > > >> vsprintf.o(.text+0x494): relocation truncated to fit: R_PPC_REL24 > >> > > >> __umoddi3 > >> > > >> vsprintf.o(.text+0x4ac): undefined reference to `__udivdi3' > >> > > >> vsprintf.o(.text+0x4ac): relocation truncated to fit: R_PPC_REL24 > >> > > >> __udivdi3 > >> > > > >> > > Kaoru> libgcc.a has those libraries. > >> > > > >> > > Yeah, but we don't link with libgcc.a. (which I forgot). > >> > > >> > Er, but isn't it (sort-of) considered a bug if the kernel links with > >> > libgcc.a ? I think the consensious on l-k would be yes. > >> > >> So you copy the code from the libgcc sources, cfr. arch/m68k/lib/. > > > > Or optimize that, yes. But linking directly is a no-no. :) > > Yes,it's should has the source in the kernel. > > However,the other archies(arm,cris,sh) use libgcc.a with static > link. > Those makefiles have > LIBGCC := $(shell $(CC) $(CFLAGS) --print-libgcc-file-name) ARM doesn't do this anymore, since it required having the correct target libgcc around. SH is planning on moving away from this in 2.5.x from what I understand. > If it's static link, it is same result isn't it? Sort of. It depends on a certain libgcc, which is bad. -- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/