| To: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: The initial results (Re: stable binutils, gcc, glibc ... |
| From: | Florian Lohoff <flo@rfc822.org> |
| Date: | Wed, 18 Oct 2000 14:30:03 +0200 |
| Cc: | Jun Sun <jsun@mvista.com>, linux-mips@fnet.fr, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com |
| In-reply-to: | <20001018035719.F7865@bacchus.dhis.org>; from ralf@oss.sgi.com on Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 03:57:19AM +0200 |
| Organization: | rfc822 - pure communication |
| References: | <39E7EB73.9206D0DB@mvista.com> <39ED2166.9B5F970@mvista.com> <20001018035719.F7865@bacchus.dhis.org> |
| Sender: | flo@rfc822.org |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.0.1i |
On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 03:57:19AM +0200, Ralf Baechle wrote:
>
> loop:
> [...]
> beq r1, r2, loop
>
> should be turned into:
>
> loop:
> [...]
> bnez r1, r2, 1f
> j loop
> 1:
>
> but of course only if the branch destination is outside the 16-bit range.
> Thanks to the ever increasing code size there are now several realworld
> examples which run into this problem. Volunteers?
By thinking about this without any knowledge of the binutils code generation.
How does this work if loop is only an external symbol ? The distance
will than be relevant when linking but then the code will already be there
and one would need to insert an instruction.
Flo
--
Florian Lohoff flo@rfc822.org +49-5201-669912
"Write only memory - Oops. Time for my medication again ..."
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: The initial results (Re: stable binutils, gcc, glibc ..., Florian Lohoff |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: The initial results (Re: stable binutils, gcc, glibc ..., Geert Uytterhoeven |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: The initial results (Re: stable binutils, gcc, glibc ..., Ralf Baechle |
| Next by Thread: | Re: The initial results (Re: stable binutils, gcc, glibc ..., Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |