> -----Original Message-----
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:24:47PM +0300, Phil Carmody wrote:
> > Can you just make that minimal change, and diff the objdump of the
> two .o's?
> > It would be worth a bug-report against the toolchain if different
> code
> > was being generated. If objdump spews huge numbers of diffs (due to
> > one address changing and pushing everything else out of kilter), then
> > feel free to forward both .o's or both objdumps to me, and I can run
> a
> > script over them, which knows to ignore unimportant address changes.
>
> See Arnd's followup - this looks like a collision with the get_signal
> macro in signal.h.
With my language-lawyer hat on, I'd suggest ``(get_signal)'' to prevent the
macro expansion:
/tmp$ cat crap.c
#define fnlikemacro(foo) foo+
int x(int y) {
int (fnlikemacro) = y;
return fnlikemacro(y)(fnlikemacro);
}
/tmp$ gcc -E crap.c
int x(int y) {
int (fnlikemacro) = y;
return y+(fnlikemacro);
}
(and yes, that compiles.)
However, it's more tempting (i.e. sensible) to just rename the
one with the weaker claim to the name.
Phil
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
