linaro-toolchain

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

16 participants
5599 discussions

[ACTIVITY] 7-11 January 2013

by Matthew Gretton-Dann

== Blueprints == Initial Current Actual fix-gcc-multiarch-testing 31 Dec 2012 31 Jan 2013 == Progress == * Infrastructure * Investigations of why Cortex-A9 HF boards are failing * Admin * Booked tickets to Connect * 'Onboarding' prep for new starters and assignees * Cortex Strings * Applied patches == Next week == * Prepare Cortex Strings release * Ensure GCC backports are up to date. * Release week. * Catch up on outstanding cards. == Future == * Run HOT/COLD partitioning benchmarks * Analyse ARM results * On x86_64 to see what the actual benefit we could get * fix-gcc-multiarch-testing * Come up with strawman proposal for updating testsuite to handle testing with varying command-line options. -- Matthew Gretton-Dann Toolchain Working Group, Linaro

12 years, 5 months

Help on epilogue dwarf info

by Zhenqiang Chen

Hi, Would you please help on how to generate correct epilogue dwarf info? Without correct dwarf info, when shrink-wrap is enabled, it tends to ICE at dwarf2cfi.c: function maybe_record_trace_start. /* We ought to have the same state incoming to a given trace no matter how we arrive at the trace. Anything else means we've got some kind of optimization error. */ gcc_checking_assert (cfi_row_equal_p (cur_row, ti->beg_row)); Issues: 1) pretend_args The attached pretend_arg.c shows an example about pretend_args dwarf info push {r2, r3} .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8 .cfi_offset 2, -8 .cfi_offset 3, -4 use r3 push {r4, r5, lr} ... pop {r4, r5, lr} add sp, sp, #8 //No instruction here to restore r2 and r3 Can we RESTORE r2 and r3? * If we notes to RESTORE r2 and r3, it might lead to wrong info for GDB since no instruction restores them. * If we do not RESTORE them, the reg_save dwarf info will not be cleared. Then the dwarf check will fail when the function is shrink-wrapped. 2) frame_pointer_needed In prologue, we set fp like fp = sp + INT After this instruction, cfi_def_cfa_register is set to fp In epilogue. we have fp += INT sp = fp Can we reset cfi_def_cfa_register back to sp? * If we set it back to sp, how to handle it in arm_unwind_emit_set, which assumes sp can not be set from other register? /* A stack increment. */ if (GET_CODE (e1) != PLUS || !REG_P (XEXP (e1, 0)) || REGNO (XEXP (e1, 0)) != SP_REGNUM || !CONST_INT_P (XEXP (e1, 1))) abort (); * If we do not set it back, to get correct dwarf info for POP after "sp = fp", we have to add notes " sp = fp + INT" for dwarf-info while we have "sp = sp + INT" in the insn. Here is the workaround POP RTL example for the attached alloca,c: (insn/f 62 61 66 3 (parallel [ (set/f (reg/f:SI 13 sp) // sp = sp + 8 (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 13 sp) (const_int 8 [0x8]))) (set/f (reg:SI 3 r3) (mem/c:SI (reg/f:SI 13 sp) [3 S4 A32])) (set/f (reg/f:SI 7 r7) (mem/c:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 13 sp) (const_int 4 [0x4])) [3 S4 A32])) ]) alloca.c:8 329 {*load_multiple_with_writeback} (expr_list:REG_UNUSED (reg:SI 3 r3) (expr_list:REG_CFA_ADJUST_CFA (set (reg/f:SI 13 sp) (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 7 r7) // sp = fp + 8 (const_int 8 [0x8]))) (expr_list:REG_CFA_RESTORE (reg/f:SI 7 r7) (expr_list:REG_CFA_RESTORE (reg:SI 3 r3) (nil)))))) (3) No idea for if (crtl->calls_eh_return) emit_insn (gen_addsi3 (stack_pointer_rtx, stack_pointer_rtx, gen_rtx_REG (SImode, ARM_EH_STACKADJ_REGNUM))); Currently I have no shrink-wrapped test case which crtl->calls_eh_return is true. Thanks! -Zhenqiang

12 years, 5 months

Instruction costs for ARM/NEON

by Renato Golin

Hi all, I'm helping the loop vectorization in LLVM and for that we need first to build the instruction cost model so we can decide whether the vectorization is worth or not. I was looking at some papers, but most of them concern with energy consumption, which is not the issue (at least not for now). The "cost" model should take the point of view of latency, stalls and pipeline cost. I know there are sporadic comments on this on the ARM ARM, but would be good to have a definite resource where to get the data from (and hope it's a public document). Does anyone know of a good place to start looking for that? Even if the document is private, we can certainly hide the information enough to make it to the LLVM code base. cheers, --renato

12 years, 5 months

compiler crash while building c++ libs

by Anup Kini

Hi All, I am using linaro-precise-ubuntu-desktop-20120626 on my ZYNQ ZC702 board which has an ARM Cortex-A9 dual core processor. I am trying to compile Point Cloud Library and its dependent libraries like FLANN, VTK, EIGEN etc.. which are basically c++ libraries. The compiler crashes with the following error msg and i am unable to figure out where the problem is. linaro@linaro-ubuntu-desktop:~/flann/flann-1.8.3-src/build$ make install [ 33%] Building CXX object src/cpp/CMakeFiles/flann_s.dir/flann/flann.cpp.o In file included from /home/linaro/flann/flann-1.8.3-src/src/cpp/flann/algorithms/kmeans_index.h:51:0, from /home/linaro/flann/flann-1.8.3-src/src/cpp/flann/algorithms/all_indices.h:38, from /home/linaro/flann/flann-1.8.3-src/src/cpp/flann/flann.hpp:45, from /home/linaro/flann/flann-1.8.3-src/src/cpp/flann/flann.h:466, from /home/linaro/flann/flann-1.8.3-src/src/cpp/flann/flann.cpp:31: /home/linaro/flann/flann-1.8.3-src/src/cpp/flann/util/logger.h:73:9: note: the mangling of ‘va_list’ has changed in GCC 4.4 c++: internal compiler error: Killed (program cc1plus) Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-4.6/README.Bugs for instructions. make[2]: *** [src/cpp/CMakeFiles/flann_s.dir/flann/flann.cpp.o] Error 4 make[1]: *** [src/cpp/CMakeFiles/flann_s.dir/all] Error 2 make: *** [all] Error 2 linaro@linaro-ubuntu-desktop:~/flann/flann-1.8.3-src/build$ Let me know if someone has faced similar issue or has any solution for this. -- *Anup Kini *Systems Engineer**** * ------------------------------ * *Synapticon** * | Cyber-Physical System Solutions **** Direct:**** +49 7335 / 186 999 17**** Fax:**** +49 7335 / 186 999 1 **** **** synapticon.com <http://www.synapticon.com/> | @synapticon_co<https://twitter.com/#!/synapticon_co> **** Synapticon GmbH | Hohlbachweg 2 | 73344 Gruibingen, DE Secretary +49 7335 / 186 999 0 | General Manager: Nikolai Ensslen Registry Court Ulm HRB 725114 | USt-ID DE271647127**** This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Please notify the sender immediately if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete it from your system.

12 years, 5 months

[PATCH] cortex strings adding aarch64 specific memcmp

by Marcus Shawcroft

/Marcus

12 years, 5 months

[PATCH] Adding test-strnlen to cortex strings.

by Marcus Shawcroft

This patch adds the strnlen test from glibc in preparation for an AArch64 specific strnlen implementation... /Marcus

12 years, 5 months

[PATCH] cortex strings adding aarch64 specific strnlen

by Marcus Shawcroft

/Marcus

12 years, 5 months

[Minutes] Minutes of Weekly Team meeting 7 Jan 2013

by Matthew Gretton-Dann

All, The minutes from today's meeting are online at: https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2013-01-07 The Action items are: TODO: Matt to investigate EEMBC Office gs8 failures TODO: Matt to talk to Dave Pigott about HF builders TODO: Matt blueprint backport of binutils 2.23.1 TODO: Matt to blueprint options for reducing QEMU based cross test noise ACTION: Matt to unreserve Michael Hope's reservations ACTION: Matt to look at why Cortex-A9 softfloat bootstraps fail in Stage2. Thanks, Matt -- Matthew Gretton-Dann Toolchain Working Group, Linaro

12 years, 5 months

[PATCH] Cortex Strings AArch64 optimized implementations of memmove, strlen and strncmp

by Marcus Shawcroft

Folks, This series of patches adds aarch64 specific implementations of memmove, strlen, strncmp to the cortex strings library and the corresponding test cases lifted directly from glibc. Enjoy /Marcus

12 years, 5 months

libstdc++6 built from gcc-4.7 missing some symbols for arm-linux-gnueabi

by Matthias Klose

asking for some help about debian #697521 and lp: #1096619. looking at the config.log files for armel/armhf I don't see any differences. I assume it's a difference in the cpu configuration (armv4/v5 vs. armv7) not soft/hard-float. any pointers?

12 years, 5 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain