On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 11:59:41AM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: > Couple of things I notice off-hand. > > The _start code looks completely different for the 2 cases. > How did you configure uClibc for the gcc-4.3.2 case? > What .config file did you use? > > > Compare the disassembly of <puts> in both cases. Something is > screwy with the one generated by gcc-4.3.2: > > 000000d8 <puts>: > d8: 4e56 fff0 linkw %fp,#-16 > dc: 48e7 044347 > de: 2030 2679 movel %a0@(0000000000000079,%d2:w:8),%d0 > e2: 0000 00 > e4: 165c 013134 > e6: 242b 0024 movel %a3@(36),%d2 > ... > > Why the undecoded words? > The disassemble in the gcc-4.1.1 case looks fine.
Hmm, I guess that means it miscompiled uclibc in that case. -- Len Sorensen _______________________________________________ uClinux-dev mailing list uClinux-dev@uclinux.org http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org To unsubscribe see: http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
