Steffen Dettmer <steffen.dettmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Where can I find more information about compiling options of libgcc.a? > (I thought it was compiled as part of gcc building [and thus > assumed it would be built with correct compiler options]. Could > it be that I used bad limiting options when the arm-elf-gcc was > compiled?) There isn't really a simple answer to that question. libgcc.a can be built multiple times with different options. The exact list can be extracted from gcc --print-multi-lib with some effort. Which options are used in your particular case depends on your configuration. >>> I searched the internet and read about `trampolines' and the >>> general possibility to have small wrapper functions in ARM code >>> able to execute very long calls (gigabyte range). >>> Compilers/linkers could theoretically automatically use such >>> "wrappers". This information is in contrast to the previous one. >> >> The linker does have support for this. ÂWhich version of the >> linker are you using? > > $ gcc -Wl,--version > GNU ld version 2.16.1 > > (does this mean it is from binutils-2.16.1 from June 2005?) Yes. The current version is 2.21. In the NEWS file I see this for binutils 2.19: "The ARM EABI linker will now generate stubs for function calls to symbols that are too far away. The placement of the stubs is controlled by a new linker command line option: --stub-group-size=N." So you may want to consider trying binutils 2.21. > is `veneer generation' the correct term for what I called `trampoline'? In this case I would typically call it a stub function. Ian
