[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4
From: |
Paul Brook |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4 |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Oct 2006 13:20:07 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.4 |
On Monday 23 October 2006 09:16, Martin Guy wrote:
> > Now, gcc4 can produce code with several return instructions (with no
> > option to turn that of, as far as I understand). You cannot cut them out,
> > and therefore you cannot chain the simple functions.
>
> ...unless you also map return instructions within the generated
> functions into branches to the soon-to-be-dropped final "return"? Not
> that I know anything about qemu internals mind u...
That's exactly what my gcc4 hacks do.
It gets complicated because a x86 uses variable length insn encodings so you
don't know where insn boundaries are, and a jmp instruction is larger than a
ret instruction so it's not always possible to do a straight replacement.
Paul
- [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, K. Richard Pixley, 2006/10/20
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Johannes Schindelin, 2006/10/22
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Martin Guy, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4,
Paul Brook <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Avi Kivity, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Paul Brook, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Avi Kivity, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Paul Brook, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Avi Kivity, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, K. Richard Pixley, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Paul Brook, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, K. Richard Pixley, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Laurent Desnogues, 2006/10/23
- Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu vs gcc4, Paul Brook, 2006/10/23