On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 10:19:14AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I seem to always be the one with the kbuild corner cases...
>
> As part of my x86 setup rewrite, there has been some concern that using
> asm(".code16gcc"); isn't as safe as it should be (because of gcc
> reordering), and making it safe apparently means disabling optimizations
> that adds at least 5% to the code size. Not really a huge deal, but
> undesirable in the long run.
>
> The alternative is to compile to a .s file and then inject ".code16gcc"
> to the top of the .s file before assembling it into a .o file. This
> means overriding some of kbuild's implicit rules, and I'm not sure how
> to do that cleanly.
Is this still relevant considering you adopted the -funit-at-a-time
proposal?
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
kbuild-devel mailing list
kbuild-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
