Alan Cox wrote:
> > why not always -fno-builtin,
> > and then call __builtin_foo when we really want the compiler's version..
> That may well be the right thing to do. Of course we rely on the compiler
> providing some of them too
true, it wouldn't be a completely transparent switchover, but it seems
like the best way to produce expected results across a bunch of
different compilers.
> but -fno-builtin will still
> give a kernel that dosnt link due to abs() and other problems.. 8)
Any others come to mind? abs is definitely special in that the compiler
[potentially] can do additional magic with the type information it has.
Maybe -fno-builtin plus
#undef abs
#define abs __builtin_abs
Thanks,
Jeff
-- Jeff Garzik | Andre the Giant has a posse. Building 1024 | MandrakeSoft | - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 23 2001 - 21:00:25 EST