Eric W. Biederman ebiederman at
Tue Apr 8 11:24:00 CEST 2003

"Ronald G. Minnich" <rminnich at> writes:

> On Tue, 8 Apr 2003, Steve Gehlbach wrote:
> > I gave it a quick test drive, looks pretty good.  I want to put together 
> > a complete rom so I can actually execute it, but I have other things on 
> > the plate right now, will do so in a week or two I hope.  Is the plan to 
> > re-code the assy that exists now, or only added code?  If yes, then we 
> > should find a place to put the code, so all of us are not re-coding the 
> > same thing and wasting time.
> I want to preserve the option of falling back to assy for those boards 
> that have working assy. That way we can verify problems as they come up 
> (and the will ...)

For those that have not seen romcc.  It outputs assembly.  So basically
it just creates another .inc file and the whole infrastructure
does not need to change.

> > Also, I noticed it doesn't like functions with no args, "int func()" 
> > fails, wants "int func(void)".  Very minor but thought I would mention.
> This is good.

The weird thing romcc does is that it takes your very last defined
function as your main function (no forward references allowed).

And that function it gets very upset if it is not void func(void);  Because
romcc considers it an error to use an uninitialized variable.  It always
fails though there are some cases where it is does not fail obviously.


More information about the coreboot mailing list