On 13/10/14 17:48, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 10/13/2014 10:43 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 10/13/2014 05:18 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
NOTE: For defaults for weak symbols, I am just adding
a prototype to the C file.
How do you then ensure that a non-weak implementation has the same
signature?
Don't ask me. I didn't add any of these weak symbol options to any BSP.
I am only fixing warnings on existing code. :)
Adding a prototype for a global function to the C file doesn't fix the warning.
It just silences the warning and obscures things.
On a more serious note, I would assume that only the linker can ensure
this. In ELF, I think it can match the signature. I have no idea if it
does or
not. Create a test case and if it doesn't do check the signature, post it
as a question to binutils.
I don't think we have anyway to ensure the match inside our space.
Weak implementations are nothing special. We need a declaration in a header
file (without the weak attribute).
--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de
PGP : Public key available on request.
Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
