Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:20:27 +0100 From: Dimitry Andric <dimitry@andric.com> To: Nate Eldredge <neldredge@math.ucsd.edu> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Andrew Brampton <brampton+freebsd-hackers@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Kernel Module - GCC Requires memmove Message-ID: <4978486B.3070504@andric.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0901211712010.18030@zeno.ucsd.edu> References: <d41814900901210412h4a1aaec6l6945dd79d07d13be@mail.gmail.com> <4977B357.2080500@andric.com> <20090121185245.00739316@kan.dnsalias.net> <d41814900901211652y617be9afp253a9f1a002c537b@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0901211712010.18030@zeno.ucsd.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2009-01-22 02:14, Nate Eldredge wrote:
> I vaguely recall Linux having a policy that compiling the kernel without
> optimization was not supported, possibly because of situations like this.
No, Linux has its own implementations of mem{cmp,cpy,move,set}, both in
fallback C versions, and optimized versions for several arches.
Compiling Linux without optimization will fail at the linking stage, due
to extern inline functions in header files, without implementation in
separate .c files.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4978486B.3070504>