From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/34] xen/arm: Provide eabi wrapper for __aeabi_mem* functions Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 16:52:54 +0000 Message-ID: <533305E6.8090808@linaro.org> References: <1395766541-23979-20-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org> <1395768302.22808.5.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <5331C725.10003@linaro.org> <1395830364.22808.43.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <5332F47F.3030000@linaro.org> <1395848877.22909.10.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <5332F9DB.4030605@linaro.org> <1395850277.22909.19.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> <20140326162236.GC29150@deinos.phlegethon.org> <533302A5.4030409@linaro.org> <20140326164620.GD29150@deinos.phlegethon.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WSr4W-0003Vx-Qe for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 16:53:00 +0000 Received: by mail-bk0-f50.google.com with SMTP id w10so637556bkz.37 for ; Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:52:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140326164620.GD29150@deinos.phlegethon.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Tim Deegan Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, stefano.stabellini@citrix.com, Ian Campbell List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 03/26/2014 04:46 PM, Tim Deegan wrote: > At 16:39 +0000 on 26 Mar (1395848341), Julien Grall wrote: >> On 03/26/2014 04:22 PM, Tim Deegan wrote: >>> At 16:11 +0000 on 26 Mar (1395846677), Ian Campbell wrote: >> >>>> The correct wording for the commit message would therefore be something >>>> like "Provide __aeabi_memset et al which are required by EABI and which >>>> compilers expect to be provided by the libc implementation", or >>>> something like that. >>> >>> +1. AFAICT these are in the same class as functions like >>> __aeabi_idiv(), (which we already supply in /arm/arm32/lib/*.S), and >>> should be handled the same way. >> >> I didn't see any issues with an __aebi_*div* function. Shall we wait >> until a failure? > > What I was trying to say is: we already supply the __aebi_*div* > functions, so adding the __aeabi_memset ones is correct. Sorry I misunderstood your previous comment. -- Julien Grall