On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 01:58:01PM +0300, Stefan Kristiansson wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 06:33:53AM +0100, Julius Baxter wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/openrisc/cpu/cpu.c b/arch/openrisc/cpu/cpu.c
> > index 25cd624..fa43bf5 100644
> > --- a/arch/openrisc/cpu/cpu.c
> > +++ b/arch/openrisc/cpu/cpu.c
> > @@ -151,7 +151,9 @@ extern void __reset(void);
> > int do_reset(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[])
> > {
> > disable_interrupts();
> > - __reset();
> > + __asm__("l.movhi r1,hi(__reset); \
> > + l.ori r1,r1,lo(__reset); \
> > + l.jr r1");
>
> Isn't this jump generated by the compiler?
> I assume we can count on that doing the right thing?
>
To clarify, the compiler can of course not know where __reset is,
but I would have for some reason expected it to emmit a l.jr sequence...
Checking is knowing, it does not.
I guess the real issue here is that the current toolchain doesn't complain
about it.
But I still would like to get that __asm__ statement hidden away somewhere,
perhaps in a openrisc_jr inline function?
And/or a comment above it why we are doing it.
Stefan
_______________________________________________
OpenRISC mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc
