Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 09:43:24AM +0900, John Summerfield wrote:
See http://gcc.gnu.org/PR32044
__udivdi3/__umoddi3 are in libgcc.a and gcc relies on it libgcc being
available, but the kernel chooses to link without libgcc - for some
routines
it has its own counterparts, for some it chooses not to implement them at
all and just assumes they won't be needed.
It doesn't "assume they won't be needed," the kernel is written to be
self-complete.
Think a while, what place does user-space code have in the kernel?
libgcc routines are self-complete. And on a bunch of architectures
Linux kernel is linked with libgcc.a, e.g. sh{,64}, xtensa, pa, cris,
I know arguing with a Red Hatter was risky:-)
h8300, m32r. If you do nm on i386 libgcc.a, you'll see:
...
_divdi3.o:
0000000000000000 T __divdi3
_moddi3.o:
0000000000000000 T __moddi3
_udivdi3.o:
0000000000000000 T __udivdi3
_umoddi3.o:
0000000000000000 T __umoddi3
...
i.e. all these routines don't need anything else.
Jakub
My only F8 system is entirely 64-bit Intel. If used, should those
appear in System.map? I couldn't see any.
Or is this a new innovation?
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Z1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
You cannot reply off-list:-)
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
