On Tue, 4 Sep 2018 at 17:29, Richard Earnshaw (lists)
wrote:
>
> On 29/08/18 11:46, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> > Hi Christophe,
> >
> > On 13/07/18 17:10, christophe.l...@st.com wrote:
> >> From: Christophe Lyon
> >>
> >> The FDPIC register is hard-coded to r9, as defined in the ABI.
> >>
> >> We
On 29/08/18 11:46, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> Hi Christophe,
>
> On 13/07/18 17:10, christophe.l...@st.com wrote:
>> From: Christophe Lyon
>>
>> The FDPIC register is hard-coded to r9, as defined in the ABI.
>>
>> We have to disable tailcall optimizations if we don't know if the
>> target function
Hi Christophe,
On 13/07/18 17:10, christophe.l...@st.com wrote:
From: Christophe Lyon
The FDPIC register is hard-coded to r9, as defined in the ABI.
We have to disable tailcall optimizations if we don't know if the
target function is in the same module. If not, we have to set r9 to
the value
From: Christophe Lyon
The FDPIC register is hard-coded to r9, as defined in the ABI.
We have to disable tailcall optimizations if we don't know if the
target function is in the same module. If not, we have to set r9 to
the value associated with the target module.
When generating a symbol
