From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from az33egw02.freescale.net (az33egw02.freescale.net [192.88.158.103]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "az33egw02.freescale.net", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8898FDDFE9 for ; Sat, 3 May 2008 08:15:24 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <481B92A7.3070302@freescale.com> Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 17:16:07 -0500 From: Scott Wood MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Fix kernel builds with newer gcc versions and -Os References: <20080502.144220.53637856.davem@davemloft.net> <481B8B89.2030703@freescale.com> <20080502.150448.32652665.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20080502.150448.32652665.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , David Miller wrote: > The problem only occurs once you reference a function that references > libc stuff, and those guys are just lucky so far. Yeah, lucky they don't need to reinvent the wheel every time the GCC/libgcc interface changes. :-) If GCC generates a call to a libgcc function that calls a libc function, I'd consider that a pretty serious bug, given that said libc function is likely to consist of GCC-generated code, which could call the same libgcc function, which calls the libc function, etc. > It's also one less variable to debug if you put the implementation > in the kernel, or do you like debugging compiler induced problems? > I don't :-) I'd say problems are more likely if you use nonstandard implementations of GCC internals... -Scott