@Xerxes,
Now I look more closely, there is some Thumb / Thumb-2 JIT implementation.
It may be necessary for one of the JIT implementers for this package to comment on this. Are you able to comment yourself / do you know how to ask?
<http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=6065>: > Would making two pops for __thumb__ instead of one big one solve this issue?
I think the answer is yes; my concern is that there may be other issues floating about which do not show up as compiler errors.
If building the package with -marm is safe (see the above post) then this is still probably the simplest, safest solution.
@Xerxes,
Now I look more closely, there is some Thumb / Thumb-2 JIT implementation.
It may be necessary for one of the JIT implementers for this package to comment on this. Are you able to comment yourself / do you know how to ask?
<http:// llvm.org/ bugs/show_ bug.cgi? id=6065>:
> Would making two pops for __thumb__ instead of one big one solve this issue?
I think the answer is yes; my concern is that there may be other issues floating about which do not show up as compiler errors.
If building the package with -marm is safe (see the above post) then this is still probably the simplest, safest solution.