On 9 October 2012 14:44, Jubi Taneja wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Matthew Gretton-Dann
> wrote:
>>
>> >> /* arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc -mcpu=cortex-a15 -mfpu=vfpv4 -S -o-
>> >> /tmp/fma.c -mfloat-abi=hard -O2 */
>> >> float f(float a, float b, float c)
>> >> {
>> >> return a * b
On 9 October 2012 17:13, Mans Rullgard wrote:
> This is what the C99 standard says:
>
> An array of character type may be initialized by a character string
> literal, optionally enclosed in braces. Successive characters of the
> character string literal (including the terminating null charac
On 9 October 2012 15:05, Scott Bambrough wrote:
> On 12-10-05 12:01 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> Here's a testcase. Compiled on ubuntu precise with
>> "arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc -O2 -marm -march=armv7-a test.c".
>>
>> typedef unsigned short u16;
>> typedef unsigned short __sum16;
>> typedef unsigned in
On 12-10-05 12:01 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On 10/05/2012 08:51 AM, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
Rob Herring writes:
> On 10/05/2012 03:24 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 09:20:56AM +0100, Mans Rullgard wrote:
> >> On 5 October 2012 08:12, Russell King - ARM Linux
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 11:21, Matthew Gretton-Dann
> wrote:
> > On 9 October 2012 10:37, Jubi Taneja wrote:
> >> I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application where I can
> make
> >> the difference between the VFPV3 and VFPV4 suppor
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Matthew Gretton-Dann <
matthew.gretton-d...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 11:58, Jubi Taneja wrote:
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > Thanks for sharing the information.
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Matthew Gretton-Dann
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 9 October 201
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Mans Rullgard wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 12:09, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On 9 October 2012 11:21, Matthew Gretton-Dann
> > wrote:
> >> On 9 October 2012 10:37, Jubi Taneja wrote:
> >>> I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application where I
> can make
On 9 October 2012 11:58, Jubi Taneja wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Thanks for sharing the information.
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Matthew Gretton-Dann
> wrote:
>>
>> On 9 October 2012 10:37, Jubi Taneja wrote:
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application wh
On 9 October 2012 12:09, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 11:21, Matthew Gretton-Dann
> wrote:
>> On 9 October 2012 10:37, Jubi Taneja wrote:
>>> I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application where I can make
>>> the difference between the VFPV3 and VFPV4 support. I tried e
On 9 October 2012 12:09, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 11:21, Matthew Gretton-Dann
> wrote:
>> On 9 October 2012 10:37, Jubi Taneja wrote:
>>> I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application where I can make
>>> the difference between the VFPV3 and VFPV4 support. I tried e
On 9 October 2012 08:53, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I just found an issue in kernel code and thought we must have a
> compilation warning for such cases.
>
> Submitted a bug here:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/1064218
>
> Problem description:
> -
>
On 9 October 2012 11:21, Matthew Gretton-Dann
wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 10:37, Jubi Taneja wrote:
>> I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application where I can make
>> the difference between the VFPV3 and VFPV4 support. I tried enabling the
>> flag -mfpu=vfpv3 and -mfpu=vfpv4 for AR
Hi Matt,
Thanks for sharing the information.
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Matthew Gretton-Dann <
matthew.gretton-d...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 9 October 2012 10:37, Jubi Taneja wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application where I can
> make
> > the di
On 9 October 2012 10:37, Jubi Taneja wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application where I can make
> the difference between the VFPV3 and VFPV4 support. I tried enabling the
> flag -mfpu=vfpv3 and -mfpu=vfpv4 for ARM Cortex A15 toolchain in my test
> code but ca
Hi All,
I wanted to see the difference in objdump of an application where I can
make the difference between the VFPV3 and VFPV4 support. I tried enabling
the flag -mfpu=vfpv3 and -mfpu=vfpv4 for ARM Cortex A15 toolchain in my
test code but cannot see the difference in two objdumps.
According to m
On 9 October 2012 13:47, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> [copy of my answer in your bug report]
>
> Hello,
>
> If you look at the assembly code generated by the compiler, you will see:
> foo_abc:
> .ascii "12345"
>
> From the gas documentation:
> `.ascii' expects zero or more string literals (*note Stri
Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > struct foo {
> >
> > char array[5];
> >
> > };
>
> I am not adding '\0' in my string at all. Is this '\0' always added by
> compiler, even in above situation?
The compiler does not add the trailing '\0'. It is added only by the string
manipulation functi
[copy of my answer in your bug report]
Hello,
If you look at the assembly code generated by the compiler, you will see:
foo_abc:
.ascii "12345"
>From the gas documentation:
`.ascii' expects zero or more string literals (*note Strings::)
separated by commas. It assembles each string (with no aut
Hi,
Thanks for your quick response.
On 9 October 2012 13:39, wrote:
> Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> When we have following declaration:
>>
>> struct foo {
>> char array[5];
>>
>> };
>>
>> And have a definition like:
>>
>> struct foo foo_abc = {
>> .array = "12345",
>> };
>>
>> Pro
Viresh Kumar wrote:
> When we have following declaration:
>
> struct foo {
> char array[5];
>
> };
>
> And have a definition like:
>
> struct foo foo_abc = {
> .array = "12345",
> };
>
> Problem here is: size of array is 5 bytes and so we can actually add a
> string with fo
Hi Guys,
I just found an issue in kernel code and thought we must have a
compilation warning for such cases.
Submitted a bug here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/1064218
Problem description:
-
When we have following declaration:
struct foo {
char arra
21 matches
Mail list logo
