Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "49c".
Did you mean:
49
2016 Nov 16
6
[SPARC]: leon2 and leon3: not respecting delayed-write to Y-register
...NOPs and maybe adding a pass to the LEONPasses.
(There is the Filler-pass, is this the right one?)
--- Code example:
clang compiles the following c-code:
int main(void)
{
int *a = (int *) 0x80000000;
int *b = (int *) 0x80000004;
return *a / *b;
}
to
[...]
49c: b5 3e 60 1f sra %i1, 0x1f, %i2
4a0: 81 80 00 1a wr %i2, %y
4a4: b0 7e 40 18 sdiv %i1, %i0, %i0
4a8: 81 c7 e0 08 ret
gcc does:
[...]
4a0: 87 38 60 1f sra %g1, 0x1f, %g3
4a4: 81 80 e0 00 wr %g3, %y
4a8: 01 00 00 00 nop
4ac: 01 0...
2007 Apr 30
0
[LLVMdev] Boostrap Failure -- Expected Differences?
...ION__.21766+0x1d>
> + 436: 75 65 jne 49d <__FUNCTION__.21679+0x1d>
> ...
>
> -00000439 <__FUNCTION__.21160>:
> +00000439 <__FUNCTION__.21073>:
> 439: 72 74 jb 4af <.str5>
> - 43b: 78 5f js 49c <__FUNCTION__.21766+0x1c>
> + 43b: 78 5f js 49c <__FUNCTION__.21679+0x1c>
> 43d: 65 gs
> 43e: 71 75 jno 4b5 <.str5+0x6>
> 440: 61 popa
> @@ -11707,25 +11707,25 @@
> 449: 6d...
2007 Apr 27
2
[LLVMdev] Boostrap Failure -- Expected Differences?
The saga continues.
I've been tracking the interface changes and merging them with
the refactoring work I'm doing. I got as far as building stage3
of llvm-gcc but the object files from stage2 and stage3 differ:
warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
warning: ./cc1plus-checksum.o differs
(Are the above two ok?)
The list below is clearly bad. I think it's every object file in
the
2008 Jun 30
4
Rebuild of kernel 2.6.9-67.0.20.EL failure
Hello list.
I'm trying to rebuild the 2.6.9.67.0.20.EL kernel, but it fails even without
modifications.
How did I try it?
Created a (non-root) build environment (not a mock )
Installed the kernel.scr.rpm and did a
rpmbuild -ba --target=`uname -m` kernel-2.6.spec 2> prep-err.log | tee
prep-out.log
The build failed at the end:
Processing files: kernel-xenU-devel-2.6.9-67.0.20.EL
Checking