From: ariel@oz.engr.sgi.com (Ariel Faigon)
To: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (SGI/Linux mailing list)
Subject: (fwd) was bug in haifa scheduler (or not)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:26:00 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <199810220626.XAA32028@oz.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
[just forwarding a bounce]
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com>
To: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
CC: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com, linux-mips@fnet.fr,
linux-mips@vger.rutgers.edu
In-reply-to: <19981022024408.A360@uni-koblenz.de> (ralf@uni-koblenz.de)
Subject: Re: Haifa scheduler bug in egcs 1.0.2
References: <19981021015047.G1830@uni-koblenz.de> <199810210139.SAA22458@dm.cobaltmicro.com> <19981022024408.A360@uni-koblenz.de>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 02:44:08 +0200
From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
The ABI is quite strict in that aspect, it wants one lo16 per hi16
for the same symbol. Binutils relax that by allowing an arbitrary
number of hi16 and one lo16 for the same symbol.
I completely understand how hi16/lo16 relocations work on MIPS, but
thanks for reiterating it to me once more.
All you have shown me is a bug in the MIPS ABI, one of thousands.
Therefore, there is no reason binutils cannot handle this sanely, and
be fixed to do so.
Later,
David S. Miller
davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com
----- End of forwarded message from owner-linux@cthulhu -----
--
Peace, Ariel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: ariel@oz.engr.sgi.com (Ariel Faigon)
To: SGI/Linux mailing list <linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com>
Subject: (fwd) was bug in haifa scheduler (or not)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:26:00 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <199810220626.XAA32028@oz.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <19981022062600.v_-Br0FrmgyiBUDrsLIBbx7LsMUx-cPUxZeKgVx2RRE@z> (raw)
[just forwarding a bounce]
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com>
To: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
CC: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com, linux-mips@fnet.fr,
linux-mips@vger.rutgers.edu
In-reply-to: <19981022024408.A360@uni-koblenz.de> (ralf@uni-koblenz.de)
Subject: Re: Haifa scheduler bug in egcs 1.0.2
References: <19981021015047.G1830@uni-koblenz.de> <199810210139.SAA22458@dm.cobaltmicro.com> <19981022024408.A360@uni-koblenz.de>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 02:44:08 +0200
From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
The ABI is quite strict in that aspect, it wants one lo16 per hi16
for the same symbol. Binutils relax that by allowing an arbitrary
number of hi16 and one lo16 for the same symbol.
I completely understand how hi16/lo16 relocations work on MIPS, but
thanks for reiterating it to me once more.
All you have shown me is a bug in the MIPS ABI, one of thousands.
Therefore, there is no reason binutils cannot handle this sanely, and
be fixed to do so.
Later,
David S. Miller
davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com
----- End of forwarded message from owner-linux@cthulhu -----
--
Peace, Ariel
next reply other threads:[~1998-10-22 6:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1998-10-22 6:26 Ariel Faigon [this message]
1998-10-22 6:26 ` (fwd) was bug in haifa scheduler (or not) Ariel Faigon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=199810220626.XAA32028@oz.engr.sgi.com \
--to=ariel@oz.engr.sgi.com \
--cc=ariel@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com \
--cc=linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.