Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:09:59 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: Peter Jeremy <peter.jeremy@alcatel.com.au> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/boot/i386/boot2 boot2.c Message-ID: <XFMail.20021217160959.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20021217202351.GO15322@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 17-Dec-2002 Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2002-Dec-17 12:40:38 -0500, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote: >>We could shave a lot of room off of boot2 by having it be a real-mode >>application instead of a protected mode one. This would allow us to >>ditch all of BTX. However, we would either need to use a C compiler >>that can generate real-mode code (gcc can't AFAIK) or we need to >>write it all in assembly. I'd really like to avoid the latter if at >>all possible. Any chance that gcc might could be tweaked to add a >>real-mode target? > > 80x86 real mode (16-bit) is significantly different to 32-bit mode - > the addressing modes are almost completely different for starters. > Supporting real-mode and generating decent compact code in particular > is going to require significantly more than a simple 'tweak' to gcc. I'm aware of that. However, I was wondering if there already existed a real-mode backend that could be enabled in our system compiler by a simple configuration tweak. :) -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20021217160959.jhb>