On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:04:02 +0100, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> > To my
> > surprise, I found that the compiler instead[2] produced the deprecated
> > R_ARM_PLT32 relocation. Considering the deprecated state of this
> > relocation type, should this be considered a bug?
>
> Yes...
>
> > Be
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:38:26 +0100, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On 14/10/11 17:40, Ben Gamari wrote:
> > I was recently trying to test GCC's behavior in producing various types
> > of ARM relocations. In particular, I was trying to produce an
> > R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation,
Recently I've been taking a foray into the ARM ABI to port the Glasgow
Haskell Compiler's internal linker to ARM. One question I've run into is
how to handle the case of interworking with R_ARM_JUMP24. This
particular relocation could be generated often by GHC as a result of
tail call optimization.
I was recently trying to test GCC's behavior in producing various types
of ARM relocations. In particular, I was trying to produce an
R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation, which requires veneer. It was suggested that
the code most likely to produce this relocation would involve some sort
of tail recursion. I wr
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 21:19:19 -0700, Justin Mattock
wrote:
> so far I've compiled most of the system
> (glibc,Xserver,etc..)
> and not really anything has crashed and burned
> except for the kernel:
>
You are using a pre-release compiler. It should be no surprise that it chokes
on the kernel. You
