> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Lord [mailto:lord@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 10:09 AM
> Ranslam, Robert E wrote:
> > FYI:
> > Its also in the IXDP425 as well as the IQ80321. These are two
> > completely different boards the only thing in common really is the
> > Xscale core.
> > Greg Ungerer posted a patch that I echoed. One problem is that is
> > appears to be and issue with a calculation. The comment seems to
> > indicate that the variable used should be 'namelen' but instead is
> > 'count'
> What patch? please forward it here.
> > One thing to consider here - the x86 is Little endian. We
> are BE on the
> > IXP425
> XFS runs fine on big endian hardware, that is where it was developed.
> This is more likely to be a problem in the gcc code generation on
> the xscale. It would not be the first time that xfs has pushed gcc
> over the edge. There is a lot of 64 bit stuff inside xfs, and we have
> seen gcc get very confused about what is in which register.
Thanks! That alleviated one of my concerns...
Ok, so we may need to 'fixup' the code is small places to temporarily
work around compiler/toolchain issues. No sure what/where those would
be yet - maybe the patch is the only place where this is required. I
guess first thing is - Does the patch actually address a code issue? Or
is the tool chain generating the wrong code? What should the
calculation the patch 'fixes-up' really result in?