Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 22:45:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> To: Peter Grehan <grehan@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ppc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: modules? Message-ID: <16637.55498.97708.217664@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> In-Reply-To: <40FDCFFC.2040305@freebsd.org> References: <16637.52362.724097.711811@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <40FDCFFC.2040305@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Grehan writes:
> I was going to ask ruslan if this was the correct place to commit
> this CFLAGS change. However, if you think it's OK, I'll do it.
Please do. Whenever I've made a change like this in the past, I've
always managed to do it wrong ;_
> The second is a gcc patch, since internal libcalls (e.g. 64-bit arith)
> don't respect the "-mlongcall" attribute. I've yet to file a bug against
> gcc for this one.
>
> diff -u -r1.1.1.9 rs6000.c
> --- rs6000.c 7 Nov 2003 02:43:04 -0000 1.1.1.9
> +++ rs6000.c 15 Jul 2004 03:40:09 -0000
> @@ -2914,6 +2914,9 @@
> && lookup_attribute ("longcall", TYPE_ATTRIBUTES (fntype))
> && !lookup_attribute ("shortcall", TYPE_ATTRIBUTES (fntype)))
> cum->call_cookie = CALL_LONG;
> + else if (!fntype)
> + if (rs6000_default_long_calls)
> + cum->call_cookie = CALL_LONG;
>
> if (TARGET_DEBUG_ARG)
Have you talked to obrien or kan about getting this patch
into at least our local version of gcc after you've filed the bug?
Thanks,
Drew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?16637.55498.97708.217664>