[Top] [All Lists]

Re: bal instruction in gcc 3.x

To: Kishore K <>
Subject: Re: bal instruction in gcc 3.x
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:52:11 +0100 (BST)
Cc: Pete Popov <>, Ralf Baechle <>, "" <>
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <1121802786.7285.88.camel@localhost.localdomain> <> <>
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Kishore K wrote:

> On the other hand, if I replace 
> bal jump_to_label   
> by 
> la t9, jump_to_label
> jalr t9
> I don't see any warning. What could be the reason ?

 Implicit assumptions in the "jal" macro.

> Can you suggest, what should be done to make the code safe for
> building on 64 bit processor.

 In this case:

        dla     t9, jump_to_label
        jalr    t9

Though we actually have auxiliary macros to make the resulting code 
readable.  So in the end you should really use something like this:

#include <asm/asm.h>

        PTR_LA  t9, jump_to_label
        jalr    t9

letting the whole mess be hidden in headers.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>