Dear Remy,
In message 3efb10970811021323w71c480fdq507814c01b834441@mail.gmail.com you wrote:
What I now believe that should be done is to investigate (compile time) what type of ABI is supported by the libgcc provided by the compiler, and adjust the compile settings to that ABI.
If such a thing needs to be done, it is a compiler-issue, and we do not have to know or care about that.
Okay, now I really lost you, first you have a very strong opinion that libgcc _must_ be used. I follow you (I admit I was wrong in the beginning), so I start investigating for a solution to actually start using libgcc on ARM, and now you tell me you do not want that libgcc is actually being used on ARM... (Besides, if you are consequent about the 'not caring' part, you should also not approve the do_div()
I did not say that.
I said if any compiler options must be adapted to match the ABI implemented by the tool chain, then this is an issue that is internal to this tool chain, and nothing we should bother about. If the tool chain wants to produce FOO-comptible code it must make sure (internally) to set all required options and provide all required library routines for the FOO ABI - whatever that might be.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk