From ae0e8d3613ad9cb6872c58cd95fc9774b3b17f5b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Hendricks Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 20:43:55 -0800 Subject: Eliminate do_div(). This eliminates the use of do_div() in favor of using libgcc functions. This was tested by building and booting on Google Snow (ARMv7) and Qemu (x86). printk()s which use division in vtxprintf() look good. Change-Id: Icad001d84a3c05bfbf77098f3d644816280b4a4d Signed-off-by: Gabe Black Signed-off-by: David Hendricks Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/2606 Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel Reviewed-by: Ronald G. Minnich --- src/console/vtxprintf.c | 17 ++--------------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) (limited to 'src/console/vtxprintf.c') diff --git a/src/console/vtxprintf.c b/src/console/vtxprintf.c index 9de25845bd..4fc6f35bd1 100644 --- a/src/console/vtxprintf.c +++ b/src/console/vtxprintf.c @@ -5,7 +5,6 @@ */ #include -#include #include #include @@ -70,20 +69,8 @@ static int number(void (*tx_byte)(unsigned char byte), if (num == 0) tmp[i++]='0'; else while (num != 0){ - /* there are some nice optimizations in the - * Macros-From-Hell that form the div64 code - * *IF* you call it with a constant. - * We're firmware, we only do bases - * 8, 10, and 16. Let's be smart. - * This greatly helps ARM, reduces the - * code footprint at compile time, and does not hurt x86. - */ - if (base == 10) - tmp[i++] = digits[do_div(num,10)]; - else if (base == 8) - tmp[i++] = digits[do_div(num,8)]; - else /* sorry, you're out of choices */ - tmp[i++] = digits[do_div(num,16)]; + tmp[i++] = digits[num % base]; + num /= base; } if (i > precision) precision = i; -- cgit v1.2.3