| To: | Jay Carlson <nop@nop.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Setting up of GP in static, non-PIC version of glibc? |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com> |
| Date: | Tue, 26 Feb 2002 12:55:32 +0100 |
| Cc: | Hartvig Ekner <hartvige@mips.com>, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com |
| In-reply-to: | <334839BA-2A77-11D6-AB38-0030658AB11E@nop.com>; from nop@nop.com on Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 12:10:50AM -0500 |
| References: | <20020225173433.B3680@dea.linux-mips.net> <334839BA-2A77-11D6-AB38-0030658AB11E@nop.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 12:10:50AM -0500, Jay Carlson wrote:
> By default non-PIC code *does* use $gp due to the brain damage in gas;
> gas defaults to -G 8 unless told otherwise (-KPIC implies -G0 so we
> don't see this in PIC code.) gcc won't know anything about this, of
> course.
>
> What I'm doing in SUBTARGET_ASM_SPEC is to write something like
> "%{fno-pic: %{!G: -G0}}"--if we're not in PIC mode, pass -G0 to gas by
> default.
>
> Anyway, once that's straightened out, -G8 does appear to work the way
> you'd expect, with the code that Hartvig pasted above---I had written a
> byte-for-byte identical patch :-)
I agree on that one except that 64kB of small data no longer seem to be
sufficient for every common application in the world. So I'd vote for a
more defensive choice of the -G value, that is 0.
Ralf
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Help about loading the kernel from host PC to board, Wolfgang Heidrich |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Problems compiling . soft-float, Ralf Baechle |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Setting up of GP in static, non-PIC version of glibc?, Jay Carlson |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Setting up of GP in static, non-PIC version of glibc?, Jay Carlson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |