This is the mail archive of the libc-ports@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the libc-ports project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Breaking ARM's mcount implementations into a separate file


On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, Thomas Schwinge wrote:

> Hello!
> 
> On 2009-12-15 02:05, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> >> I inspected the pre / post libraries (symbols, disassembly), and did test
> >> runs to confirm that profiling still works in the ``normal'' and -mthumb
> >> cases.
> >
> > I'm not sure of the significance of having separate ARM/Thumb versions, 
> 
> Well, if I understand this correctly, it was you, together with Paul
> Brook, who have added this code on 2009-02-05.

You need to look more carefully at the history before I merged Thumb-2 
support from EGLIBC to FSF ports.  The new mcount entry point dates back 
at least to <http://www.eglibc.org/archives/patches/msg00449.html> and 
other discussions around that time, while Thumb-2 mcount comes from 
<http://www.eglibc.org/archives/patches/msg00143.html>.  I.e., on 
2009-02-05 I merged existing code without knowing the significance of 
every bit of it.

> > #if defined(__thumb2__)
> >         .thumb
> >         .syntax unified
> > #endif
> 
> This is correct.  I transformed the code without thinking about that.  Do
> I need to resend the patch, or can the one who is comitting it easily add
> the two assembler directives to the [__thumb2__] code?

You'll need to send the patch in a form appropriate for committing, tested 
as both ARM and Thumb-2.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]