From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757903AbZHGNBn (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:01:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757893AbZHGNBm (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:01:42 -0400 Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([88.191.76.200]:46265 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757873AbZHGNBl (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:01:41 -0400 Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 15:01:30 +0200 From: Albin Tonnerre To: Matthieu CASTET Cc: Alain Knaff , Russell King - ARM Linux , "sam@ravnborg.org" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Add support for LZO-compressed kernels for ARM Message-ID: <20090807130130.GE4455@laptop> References: <20090731093107.GA29704@merkur.ravnborg.org> <1249311501-23102-1-git-send-email-albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com> <1249311501-23102-2-git-send-email-albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com> <1249311501-23102-3-git-send-email-albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com> <1249311501-23102-4-git-send-email-albin.tonnerre@free-electrons.com> <20090806224055.GH31579@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090807092423.GA4455@laptop> <4A7BF5B8.4030907@knaff.lu> <20090807102117.GB4455@laptop> <4A7C14EB.1060701@parrot.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4A7C14EB.1060701@parrot.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 01:50:03PM +0200, Matthieu CASTET wrote : > Albin Tonnerre a écrit : > > On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 11:36:56AM +0200, Alain Knaff wrote : > >> On 08/07/09 11:24, Albin Tonnerre wrote: > >>> Regards, > >> Could it be that the patches that remove division (zutil.h and inflate.c) > >> have somehow not been applied? > > Indeed, they've not been applied. However, I'd rather try to understand why > > exactly this is an issue when compiling with -Os and not -O2 instead of working > > around it by removing the divisions. > Look at the generated code. > Arm doesn't have division instruction. > May be at -Os gcc emit a call to the software division, but at -O2 it > manage to optimise the division (transform it in shift, inline some > builtin, ...). Yes, I figured that out. What I don't get, though, is that it fails while the software division symbol (__aeabi_uidivmod here) does seem to be provided by libgcc. Regards, -- Albin Tonnerre, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com