| To: | Gilad Benjamini <yaelgilad@myrealbox.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: "-G" optimizations |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> |
| Date: | Mon, 19 Jan 2004 07:24:16 +0100 |
| Cc: | linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <1074467780.c913e0a0yaelgilad@myrealbox.com> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <1074467780.c913e0a0yaelgilad@myrealbox.com> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 11:16:20PM +0000, Gilad Benjamini wrote: > was compiled with "-G0" while a module was compiled > with "-G8". > Is this a legal combination ? > If it isn't, what could the implications be ? It's never legal. The -G option addresses data relative to $28 but Linux uses it already to store the current pointer. Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | "-G" optimizations, Gilad Benjamini |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | In r4k, where does PC point to?, karthikeyan natarajan |
| Previous by Thread: | "-G" optimizations, Gilad Benjamini |
| Next by Thread: | In r4k, where does PC point to?, karthikeyan natarajan |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |