From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5897 invoked by alias); 19 May 2006 19:27:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 5835 invoked by alias); 19 May 2006 19:27:05 -0000 Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 19:27:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060519192705.5834.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "drow at false dot org" To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20060519183843.2675.kazu@gcc.gnu.org> References: <20060519183843.2675.kazu@gcc.gnu.org> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug ports/2675] arm-none-eabi-linux-gnueabi doesn't build X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-05/txt/msg00109.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2006-05-19 19:27 ------- Subject: Re: arm-none-eabi-linux-gnueabi doesn't build On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 07:22:53PM -0000, roland at gnu dot org wrote: > There is no reason in general that function should not be inlined. > It really should be inlined. Perhaps you can find a fix for the arm build that > does not deoptimize the code. Then I'll mark it non-inlined in an ARM copy; but I expect this to cause problems on many other targets. It only materializes on very recent versions of GCC, because previously we used -fno-unit-at-a-time which suppressed the "inline static functions called once" optimization; if GCC is new enough we use -fno-toplevel-reorder instead. Sedding GCC's assembly output has historically worked "well enough" for simple calls to known static functions, but it's not surprising that call_gmon_start requires a constant pool. I expect to see similar problems at least for SH. Anyway, you want an ARM-only fix, you'll get one :-) I'll take care of it. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2675 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.