Message-ID:	<19990701171627.B12674@tabor.ta.jcu.cz>
Date:	Thu, 1 Jul 1999 17:16:27 +0200
From:	Jan Hubicka <hubicka AT ta DOT jcu DOT cz>
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, Jan Hubicka <hubicka AT atrey DOT karlin DOT mff DOT cuni DOT cz>
Subject:	Re: Regparm patch.
References:	<19990630140207 DOT 12975 AT atrey DOT karlin DOT mff DOT cuni DOT cz> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 990701132020 DOT 12509I-100000 AT is>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Mutt 0.93i
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.990701132020.12509I-100000@is>; from Eli Zaretskii on Thu, Jul 01, 1999 at 01:20:55PM +0300
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Thu, Jul 01, 1999 at 01:20:55PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> 
> > Here is the patch for current CVS to make djgpp mregparm ready.
> 
> I would suggest to wait with the patches until some experience is
> gathered in using a modified library.  A good way would be to build
> some of the development utilities (compiler, binutils, make, etc.)
> with a modified library and use them for a while.
I've succesfully compiled some programs (byte benchmarks, utilities
present in the djgpp source tree, aalib and bb and some other..
thinks seems to work, but fact is that all of these tests just
very small piece of libc (stdio and stuff), but this is true about
compiler, binutils and make as well.
I agree that some testing is needed.
> 
> > -void	__dpmi_yield(void);									/* INT 0x2F AX=1680 */
> > +__asmlinkage void	__dpmi_yield(void);									/* INT 0x2F AX=1680 */
> 
> I think this is wrong: __dpmi_yield is not an assembly function, it is
> written in C (see src/libc/dpmi/api/2f_1680.c).
Oops.. I will fix it. Luckily enought it don't have parameter, so it doesn't
matter...
Thank you for pointing this out.

Honza

- Raw text -