I forgot to ask. Which newlib version are you using? Regards, Adam Adam Turowski wrote: > > One more thing: I haven't recompiled gcc, but I don't think I should > because stubs are added by linker. > > Hope that clarifies things, > Adam > > > Adam Turowski wrote: >> >> I recompiled newlib and double checked what binutils version was used >> during linking stage. Unfortunately still have no success. >> >> What I found is that almost __from_arm stubs all broken - there are zeros >> in there instead of proper code. Only one stub __from_arm is OK (the call >> comes from assembly file) and all __from_thumb calls looks OK in >> dissassembly. >> >> There is another weird thing I found when I've converted from .elf to >> binary using "arm-elf-objcopy -O binary" command. The resulting binary >> values generated for these stubs code are 4 byte shifted towards front of >> the file. For example stub code starting on 0x5EA8 address in >> dissassembly file starts on 0x5EA4 >> address in resulting binary. The rest binary code (I mean non stub) is in >> the right places. >> >> Have you got any suggestions? >> >> Thanks >> Adam >> >> >> Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote: >>> >>> I think I didn't need to recompile the newlib, but try it, and check >>> that your new ld/gcc is being effectively used at link time. >>> >>> Miguel Ángel >>> >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/gcc-4.4.0-arm-thumb-interwork-_from_arm-bad-stub-generation-tp24016313p24256911.html Sent from the gcc - Help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
