I'm compiling an application built with TI's DVSDK 3 *[0].
/home/user/ti/dvsdk/dvsdk_3_01_00_10/linuxutils_2_25_02_08/packages/ti/sdo/linuxutils/cmem/lib/cmem.a470MV(cmem.o470MV):(.ARM.exidx+0x0):
undefined reference to `__aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0'
arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc --version
arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.5.2-5ubuntu2~ppa1) 4.5.2
arm-linux-gnueabi-ld --version
GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.21.0.20110302
More full output is here (but it isn't particularly helpful due to TI's RTSC
make system's black-magic)
https://gist.github.com/925674
FYI: the MV in cmem.a470MV stands for MontaVista.
This name is hard-coded somewhere even though it's not being linked against
a MontaVista system.
I believe the 470 means that it should work with ARMv4 through ARMv7, but
I'm not positive.
My googling suggest that this is a toolchain bug and that the best way
around the issue is to create a file which defines the function as a void
dummy and include it.
http://www.codesourcery.com/archives/arm-gnu/msg03604.htmlhttp://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/78649http://www.cs.fsu.edu/~baker/devices/lxr/http/ident?i=__aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0
I have a script that I'll post shortly with instructions as to how to setup
TI's DVSDK with Linaro
AJ ONeal
[0] I'm not using the latest DVSDK version 4 because the paths and such are
so hard-coded for the 2009q3 version of codesourcery on ubuntu 10.04 LTS
that I don't know where to start fixing it.
Hi All,
This is based upon gcc version 4.5.3 (20110221 pre-release)
Any help appreciated
This shows a bug in the Linaro gcc compiler with the Arm NEON
vset_lane intrinsic
Note in the objdump that the vmov.8 instruction that places the
value in the vector for the non-q version uses 1 where it should use
2 and 3:
18: ee410bb0 vmov.8 d17[1], r0
1c: ee420bb0 vmov.8 d18[1], r0
20: ee400b90 vmov.8 d16[0], r0
3c: ee440bb0 vmov.8 d20[1], r0
For the q version the vmov.8 instructions are correct:
40: ee420bf0 vmov.8 d18[3], r0
54: ee420bd0 vmov.8 d18[2], r0
64: ee400b90 vmov.8 d16[0], r0
70: ee420bb0 vmov.8 d18[1], r0
/* Source code */
#include <arm_neon.h>
static uint8x8_t vec[5]
static uint8x16_t qvec[5];
void set(uint8_t value)
{
vec[1] = vset_lane_u8(value, vec[0], 3);
vec[2] = vset_lane_u8(value, vec[0], 2);
vec[3] = vset_lane_u8(value, vec[0], 1);
vec[4] = vset_lane_u8(value, vec[0], 0);
qvec[1] = vsetq_lane_u8(value, qvec[0], 3);
qvec[2] = vsetq_lane_u8(value, qvec[0], 2);
qvec[3] = vsetq_lane_u8(value, qvec[0], 1);
qvec[4] = vsetq_lane_u8(value, qvec[0], 0);
}
Thx
Lee
Hi,
libunwind:
* the initial support for resuming at a certain stack frame went upsream
* learned about the various signal frame layouts on ARM
* RT frames, non-RT frames for present and pre 2.6.18 kernels
* implemented support for RT signal frame detection on ARM
* started to implement support for unw_resume if signal frames are involved
* attended a class on Friday
Note: Monday was a public holiday.
Regards
Ken
== GDB ==
* Committed series of patches to fix bug #615978 (Failure to software
single-step into signal handler) to mainline and Linaro GDB.
* Drafted blueprint linaro-toolchain-o-cross-debug
== GCC ==
* Split bug #771900 (Linaro GCC 4.5 switch optimization breaks profiled
bootstrap) off bug #759409 (Profiled bootstrap fails in GCC 4.5).
Tracked down root cause of bug #759409 / PR middle-end/43085, and
posted fix to gcc-patches.
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards
Ulrich Weigand
--
Dr. Ulrich Weigand | Phone: +49-7031/16-3727
STSM, GNU compiler and toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell/B.E.
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter | Geschäftsführung: Dirk
Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen | Registergericht: Amtsgericht
Stuttgart, HRB 243294
Hi All,
I found Jie has committed a patch
"http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2010-05/msg00083.html".
I am using the newest binary utils(2.21) and encounted the following ASSERT in
arm_elf32.c:
+ if (out_attr[i].i == 0)
+ {
+ BFD_ASSERT (out_attr[Tag_ABI_HardFP_use].i == 0);
My compiling options are as below,
ASM_FLAGS :=
\
-gdwarf-2 \
-mfpu=vfp \
-mfloat-abi=softfp \
-mthumb-interwork
C_FLAGS :=
\
$(ASM_FLAGS) \
-O3 -Wno-all \
-fno-optimize-sibling-calls \
-mlong-calls \
-ffunction-sections \
CPP_FLAGS :=
\
-fno-rtti \
-fno-exceptions \
LINK_FLAGS :=
\
--gc-sections -nostdlib \
-L ../stdlib \
-Wl,--as-needed \
-Wl,-no-enum-size-warning \
--cref \
ARFLAGS :=
\
rcs
Can anyone give me any tip about why the assert is triggered?
I have reported a bug here:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12700
But not sure whether it is a bug.
-barry
Hi All,
I am using 2011.3 4.5 linaro GCC(armv7-a vfpv3d16) to compile kernel
and modules. I select to compile all codecs as modules:
"config SND_SOC_ALL_CODECS
tristate "Build all ASoC CODEC drivers"
"
as M and I2C/SPI too.
Then in the kernel dir, run "make" to get both vmlinux and modules, I
found snd-soc-wm8974.ko, snd-soc-wm8940.ko and snd-soc-wm8510.ko will
fail due to "__aeabi_uldivmod undefined".
If i comment do_div() in these codec drivers, this issue will
disappear. But it is strange there are many codecs which use do_div()
too, for example:
sound/soc/codecs/max98088.c
sound/soc/codecs/max9850.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8350.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8400.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8510.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8580.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8753.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8804.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8900.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8904.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8940.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8955.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8960.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8974.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8978.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8985.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8990.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8991.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8993.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8994.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm8995.c
sound/soc/codecs/wm9081.c
but others can pass the compiling except those 3 modules. Is it due to
a wrong optimization by gcc?
Other information:
1. old tool-chains we are using can pass the compiling of the 3 modules.
2. If i built all codecs into kernel image, these 3 drivers don't
report error while compiling.
Thanks
Barry
2011/4/27 Mark Brown <broonie(a)opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 04:50:12PM +0800, Barry Song wrote:
>
> > Marking pll_factors() as noinline or putting asm("" : "+r"(source)); before the
> > call to do_div() works around the problem.
>
> If we do have to do something in the callers rather than in do_div() the
> annotation seems substantially more taseful than inserting a random asm
> into the code.
I agree. for this patch which will not be applied, people can just get
information about how to workaround the gcc issue while they have the
same problem. google can find there are other people who failed to
compile wm8974 module too. eg.
http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/03/30/%23ubuntu-arm.txt
Andrew Stubbs, Michael Hope in Linaro's toolchain team are working
hard on this gcc issue. there have been many update today:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48783
Hi All,
As i have frequently said, we are using 2011.3 4.5 linaro gcc. For the
following codes, if we compile it by -O2, it will crash with "segment
fault", if we just comment " if(unifi_debug >= level) {", all will be
ok.
If we don't compile it by -O2, all will be ok too.
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdarg.h>
#define DEBUG_BUFFER_SIZE 80
int unifi_debug = 5;
void
unifi_trace(void* ospriv, int level, const char *fmt, ...)
{
static char s[DEBUG_BUFFER_SIZE];
va_list args;
unsigned int len;
if(unifi_debug >= level) {
va_start(args, fmt);
len = vsnprintf(&(s)[0],
(DEBUG_BUFFER_SIZE),
fmt, args);
va_end(args);
if (len >= DEBUG_BUFFER_SIZE) {
(s)[DEBUG_BUFFER_SIZE - 2] = '\n';
(s)[DEBUG_BUFFER_SIZE - 1] = 0;
}
printf("%s", s);
}
}
int main(void)
{
char *prog = "/usr/sbin/unififw";
unifi_trace(NULL, 1, "start %s\n", prog);
return 0;
}
Thanks
Barry