Home > Gcc Error > Gcc Error Branch Out Of Range

Gcc Error Branch Out Of Range

How? Comment 5 Mikael Pettersson 2010-06-22 12:22:41 UTC It's caused by r148770, which is when Richard Earnshaw added compressed switch table support for Thumb-1. Message #41 received at [email protected] (full text, mbox, reply): From: Matthias Klose To: Daniel Jacobowitz , [email protected], Ryan Murray Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Bug#207915: gcc-3.3: [mips/el] Potential solution Date: If the symbol is tagged using an assembler directive .type,%function or .thumb_func, the Thumb bit in the address you get will be set appropriately. (GCC always does this for C functions.)

Seventh, while the + constraint usually is ok, it has been the source of some bugs over the years, so in this case, I probably would move the initialization into the Full text and rfc822 format available. Gcc (egcs-2.90.27 980315 (egcs-1.0.2 release)) complains about ../bin/linux/lat_ctx.s: Assembler messages: ../bin/linux/lat_ctx.s:4293: Error: Branch out of range ../bin/linux/lat_ctx.s:40459: Error: Branch out of range At line 4293 it jumps to line 40460 using Long chunks of inline assembly can break that and make it think the code is shorter than it is.

The # cycles include overhead from measuring. To produce Thumb-2 code you still need to turn on unified assembler syntax, which can only be done using the .syntaxunified directive in the assembler source. To work around that problem, make sure you have verbose info turned on in File > Prefs. How to resolve it The common situation is that the code is trying to load a value which is too large to fit as an immediate operand in a MOV instruction,

Code: { int32_t result; int32_t temp; __asm ( //volatile not neccessary "\t qsub %[result],%[a],%[b] \n" //a-b //is q set? "\t mrs %[temp],apsr \n" "\t and %[temp],#0x8000000 \n" "\t cbnz %[temp],0f \n" This is not a list of all possibilities, just the most common/popular ones. For division with zero, [edit] mine is wrong for some cases [/edit] It depends on the usage-case which solution is better. How can I fix this?

Now, only the case /0 is different Last edited by Frank B; 02-21-2016 at 08:29 PM. For register shifts tie operands 0 and 1. (peephole2 for above): Check that register-controlled shifts have suitably tied operands. However, if the little bit of code you're hacking knows that the Thumb bit is never set in the address, it may be safe not to set it so long as assembles either to fixed-size 32-bit (ARM) instructions, or mixed-size (16-/32-bit) Thumb-2 instructions (lucid default), depending on the GCC configuration and command-line options (-marm, -mthumb).

Spinlocks are relatively straightforward to implement using these primitives; but many other issues need to be taken into account in order to implement a robust multithreaded primitive such as a conventional However, this line is a problem, because "q_is_set" isn't defined anywhere. Using this sequence in Thumb code will not work correctly, since the value in lr will not be correct for an interworking return. #ifdefs may be required for compatibility with e.g., It can convert an out-of-range branch into a different longer sequence with a longer range via branch relaxation.

This can have a bad impact on performance in modern systems with a complex hardware architecture and/or multiple processors or other bus masters, so this instruction is deprecated. https://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/2000-03/msg00060.html Most are a bit out of date, but this one isn't too bad: http://www.coranac.com/tonc/text/asm.htm Warning: the above page is a good introduction, but some things are no longer true for newer Generally, GCC defines one macro depending on the targeted variant: Macro Variant BX supported Thumb Variant supported Distro Support Notes Debian Ubuntu arm armel (lenny) jaunty karmic lucid __ARM_ARCH_2__ ARMv2 or Let me say "THANK YOU" !

The assembler may or may not magically introduce a veneer/trampoline depending on whether or not it knows that the destination is in a different instruction set and is definitely a code Since it is declared inside function scope, the asm("...") is used to access a named register, and you should get a warning similar to: Code: warning: ignoring asm-specifier for non-static local Traditional Thumb-1 assembler (rare) You probably won't see any of this! Using the PC as a base address register (i.e., the first operand inside the brackets [pc...]) is allowed in simple load and store operations, but you may not multiply/shift/scale or auto-update

The assembler will insert the literals in the next compiler-generated literal pool, or at the end of the file, whichever occurs first. ("literal pool" = each place in the text section If you really can't find a good location, you may need to put .ltorg in the middle of your code somewhere and use an unconditional branch to jump over it. On ARMv7, there is a DMB instruction which performs this operation. SUB{S} r3, r3, r1 @ result is in r3:r0The second example can produce more compact code because 16-bit encodings are available for the all these instructions if the flag setting variants

The code above will expand to LDRr0,[pc,#] followed somewhere later by .long. Files: 3fc3f50c1e032c089b4263b568037b59 2440 devel standard gcc-3.3_3.3.2ds2-0pre3.dsc 49e365f6c3f02f9258b9281749a8c878 25405003 devel standard gcc-3.3_3.3.2ds2.orig.tar.gz 72003199cd14445e67edb333799a8415 2228267 devel standard gcc-3.3_3.3.2ds2-0pre3.diff.gz 13b6edad5552325dda0403cc67fe9999 82940 doc optional cpp-3.3-doc_3.3.2-0pre3_all.deb 1f427ff82d189d22c3ad662810792967 2525188 doc optional libstdc++5-3.3-doc_3.3.2-0pre3_all.deb 260e5d986210dbc3b913e87dc1987ec7 268970 doc optional g77-3.3-doc_3.3.2-0pre3_all.deb data:The assembler resolves ADR to a PC-based ADD or SUB, with appropriate adjustments to the offset.

Backport r182621 from mainline 2011-12-21 Richard Earnshaw

Note: this section only applies to obtaining the address of data only. Quick Reference The target instruction set state is determined is different ways depending on the type of branch. if

For example, when taking a lock it is necessary that everything in the system knows the lock has been taken, before anyone sees modifications happen on the object which the lock Reply With Quote 02-22-2016,12:24 AM #12 MichaelMeissner View Profile View Forum Posts Private Message Visit Homepage Senior Member Join Date Nov 2012 Location Ayer Massachussetts Posts 1,952 Originally Posted by Frank This is not usually a problem because a given atomic object will generally be managed by a single piece of library code shared between the threads or processes accessing it. It is best not to attempt to use them for other purposes, because they have different memory barrier behaviour from the other atomic intrinsics.

it was so much work that i said "i'll never dig into this, this deep, again" But..at the end..i had assembly output that was ok (but not optimized) Last edited by De kio “saluton” estas la rekta objekto?