Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 13:14:21 -0700 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Subject: Re: undefined reference to `memset' Message-ID: <42431F9D.5080906@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <86acosykew.fsf@xps.des.no> References: <IDTR9T00.LMF@hadar.amcc.com> <200503232122.01937.peter@wemm.org> <86acosykew.fsf@xps.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> writes: > >>I wondered if it might be because of something like -O2 (don't do that) > > > Peter, stop that. The kernel builds and runs fine with -O2, and has > for a long time. > > DES No it doesn't. See the gymnastics that Bill Paul had to do recently in the iee80211 code to get around the insane inlining that gcc does with -O2. I'm not saying that gcc produces incorrect code, but I am saying that there is very strong evidence that it produces code that is incompatible with the restrictions inherent to the kernel, mainly that stack space is not infinite. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42431F9D.5080906>