From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763120AbXGKA0s (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:26:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758564AbXGKA0k (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:26:40 -0400 Received: from quark.didntduck.org ([69.55.226.66]:38094 "EHLO quark.didntduck.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758055AbXGKA0j (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:26:39 -0400 Message-ID: <469423AA.7040007@didntduck.org> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:26:18 -0400 From: Brian Gerst User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070615) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pawel Dziepak CC: "H. Peter Anvin" , Segher Boessenkool , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [x86 setup 13/33] Header file to produce 16-bit code with gcc References: <11840359321823-git-send-email-hpa@zytor.com> <11840373002601-git-send-email-hpa@zytor.com> <108510B6-B9BE-49D4-BDCA-E25CA20CB29B@kernel.crashing.org> <200707101721.58937.ak@suse.de> <4693AA56.9040109@zytor.com> <551EA412-3D35-4BCD-ACAE-B6A7BE3CBF9B@kernel.crashing.org> <4693EF8E.9070403@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Pawel Dziepak wrote: > On 7/10/07, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >> > The alternative, of course, is to compile to an .s file and insert >> > .code16gcc into the .s file. This makes the Makefile uglier, but >> > would >> > be more resilient against oddball gcc changes. >> >> This would be even more fragile. The exact format of GCC's >> assembler code output isn't defined at all, so in principle >> this is a hopeless task. In practice just putting the >> .code16gcc directive on the first line would likely work >> though, GCC never generates a .code32 AFAIK, but it isn't >> guaranteed that this will work (or will keep working). > > Unfortunately, .code16gcc is still experimental (at least binutils' > website says that). What is worse, it says that it is possible that > 16bit code produced on GCC won't work on pre-80386 processors (before > switching to protected mode you have to think about cpu as a > pre-80386). What .code16gcc does is produce 32-bit instructions that are meant to be run from a 16-bit code segment (real mode or 16-bit protected) by using address and data size override prefixes. This means that pre-386 processors cannot run the code because they cannot understand 32-bit instructions. -- Brian Gerst