linaro-toolchain

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

5599 discussions

[ANNOUNCE] Linaro GDB 7.5 2012.09 released

by Ulrich Weigand

The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the release of Linaro GDB 7.5. Linaro GDB 7.5 2012.09 is the first release in the 7.5 series. ***NOTE*** Linaro GDB 7.5 2012.09 is identical to the FSF GDB 7.5 release, except for the change in version number and Linaro branding, since all Linaro GDB features were already accepted upstream and are included in the FSF release as-is. Future releases in the Linaro GDB 7.5 series may include additional ARM-focused bug fixes and enhancements. The source tarball is available at: https://launchpad.net/gdb-linaro/+milestone/7.5-2012.09 More information on Linaro GDB is available at: https://launchpad.net/gdb-linaro

12 years, 9 months

[ANNOUNCE] Linaro QEMU 2012.09 released

by Peter Maydell

The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the release of Linaro QEMU 2012.09. Linaro QEMU 2012.09 is the latest monthly release of qemu-linaro. Based off upstream (trunk) QEMU, it includes a number of ARM-focused bug fixes and enhancements. There are no major changes in this month's release, but it has been updated to be based on upstream's recent 1.2.0 release. The source tarball is available at: https://launchpad.net/qemu-linaro/+milestone/2012.09 More information on Linaro QEMU is available at: https://launchpad.net/qemu-linaro

12 years, 9 months

[ANNOUNCE] Linaro GCC 4.7 and Linaro GCC 4.6 2012.09 released

by Michael Hope

The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the 2012.09 release of both Linaro GCC 4.7 and Linaro GCC 4.6. Linaro GCC 4.7 2012.09 is the sixth release in the 4.7 series. Based off the latest GCC 4.7.1+svn191123 release, it includes ARM-focused performance improvements and bug fixes. Interesting changes include: * Updates to GCC 4.7.1+svn191123 * Adds support for the NEON vext instruction when shuffling * Backports improvements to scheduling transfers between VFP and core registers * Backports support for the UBFX instruction on certain bit extract idioms Fixes: * PR54252 ICE with too wide alignment assertion on vectorised code * PR54212 ICE due to generating a predicated NEON vdup instruction Linaro GCC 4.6 2012.09 is the nineteenth release in the 4.6 series. Based off the latest GCC 4.6.3+svn191000 release, this is the sixth release after entering maintenance. Interesting changes include: * Updates to 4.6.3+svn191000 The source tarballs are available from: https://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+milestone/4.7-2012.09 https://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+milestone/4.6-2012.09 Downloads are available from the Linaro GCC page on Launchpad: https://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro More information on the features and issues are available from the release page: https://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/4.7/4.7-2012.09 Mailing list: http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/ Questions? https://ask.linaro.org/ Interested in commercial support? Inquire at support(a)linaro.org -- Michael

12 years, 9 months

GCC 4.6.x miscompiling arm-linux (including Linaro GCC)

by Nicolas Pitre

Hello folks, FYI There is a thread on the arm-linux-kernel mailing list about a GCC bug, and the Linaro version appears to be affected as well. Here's the thread: http://news.gmane.org/group/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/thread=186563 Nicolas

12 years, 9 months

[Activity] Week 36

by Zhenqiang Chen

Summary: * Test shrink-wrap code Details: 1. Add simple_return support in function thumb2_expand_return for shrink-wrap. Here is the make check status * One new fail is due to code size increase. We'd disable it when optimizing function for size on THUMB2. * Other new fails is due to dwarf info. Root cause is ICE at function maybe_record_trace_start gcc_checking_assert (cfi_row_equal_p (cur_row, ti->beg_row)); Here is the failed code segment: tst ... L1 push {r4} ... ldr r4, ... L1: bx lr // common simple return from two branches. Here are the results for cur_row and ti->beg_row of trace starting at L1: {cfa = {offset = 0, base_offset = 0, reg = 13, indirect = 0, in_use = 0}, cfa_cfi = 0x0, reg_save = 0x0} {cfa = {offset = 4, base_offset = 0, reg = 13, indirect = 0, in_use = 0}, cfa_cfi = 0x0, reg_save = 0x7ffff726ab70} Try gcc-linaro-4.5-2011.03. It does not generate the common bx lr. test L1 push {r4} ... pop {r4} bx lr L1: bx lr There is similar bug about it. But the fix is useless for us: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50833 Plans: * Continue shrink-wrap task. Best regards! -Zhenqiang

12 years, 9 months

[ACTIVITY] Sep 3-Sep 7

by Christophe Lyon

== Progress == * Neon vext support for builtin_shuffle: * Committed vext patch upstream, as well as a small cleanup patch. * Merged vext support into gcc-linaro/4.7 branch. * Posted upstream a follow-up patch to make vext tests support big-endian. Filed PR 54517: wrong code generation in big-endian with inline in these tests. * Updated patch to fix 3 testcases in big-endian after upstream comments. * Implement builtin_bswap16: * Posted upstream a patch to implement bswap16. Discussion on-going, to have less duplication between arm and thumb patterns. * Investigating how to make GCC catch the (x<<8)|(x>>8) construct (where x is unsigned short) and map it to rev16, like builtin_bswap16. == Next == * Continue with bswap16 support.

12 years, 9 months

[ACTIVITY] report week 36

by Peter Maydell

Current Milestones: || || Planned || Estimate || Actual || || clean up kvm-qemu cp i/f || 2012-09-20 || 2012-09-20 || || || fake-trustzone || 2012-10-15 || 2012-10-15 || || Also planned: general keeping up with kernel changes; upstream patch review; qemu-linaro releases. May change dates to align with overall KVM plan for the quarter when that is finalised. Previous Milestones: ||cp15-rework || 2012-01-06 || 2012-06-23 || 2012-06-24 || ||a15-lpae-support || 2012-07-13 || 2012-07-20 || 2012-07-20 || == track-kvm-abi-changes == * merged in Christoffer's patches altering the IRQ delivery ABI == other == * resent some patches as qemu trunk has reopened after 1.2 release * misc upstream review work * prep for qemu-linaro 2012.09 release * AFDS (annual review) season again KVM blueprint progress tracker: http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/backlog?group_by=topic&colour_by=state&pr… -- PMM

12 years, 9 months

[ACTIVITY] Week 3 - 7 September

by Matthew Gretton-Dann

== Progress == * Started looking at symbol_ref splitting benchmark results * One big regression ~18% * Started to investigate whether code alignment was the problem as before * Hot/Cold partitioning in PGO: * https://blueprints.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+spec/hot-cold-partitioning-in-… * Sent fixes so far upstream * Spent most of the week looking at a Silent Code Gen fault in reload. * Admin * Some interviewing == Next Week == * symbol_ref splitting * Test code alignment hypothesis * Test v2 patch. * Hot/Cold Partitioning: * Investigate remaining silent code-gen faults and non-termination issue in SPEC * If failures are fixed start profiledbootstraps and tests on the central boards. == Future == * Look at Cards for Vectorization, PGO and LTO with Michael. -- Matthew Gretton-Dann Linaro Toolchain Working Group matthew.gretton-dann(a)linaro.org

12 years, 9 months

Issue with reload and indirect branches

by Matthew Gretton-Dann

All, I have run into a(nother) problem with reload with -freorder-blocks-and-partition. Attached is my WIP patch (some of this has been sent up to gcc-patches for review), and also the profile information (tarred up) I have gathered in the train session I get a segfault when executing crafty, which seems to come from incorrect code generation in iterate.c. The following shows some of the RTL dump after IRA (insn 3087 1471 3088 163 (clobber (reg:DI 682 [ D.7985 ])) -1 (nil)) (insn 3088 3087 3085 163 (set (subreg:SI (reg:DI 682 [ D.7985 ]) 0) (sign_extend:SI (mem/c:QI (reg/f:SI 1417) [0 transposition_id+0 S1 A8]))) 735 {*thumb2_extendqisi_v6} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg/f:SI 1417) (nil))) ... (insn 3089 1477 1478 163 (set (subreg:SI (reg:DI 682 [ D.7985 ]) 4) (ashiftrt:SI (subreg:SI (reg:DI 682 [ D.7985 ]) 0) (const_int 31 [0x1f]))) 130 {*arm_shiftsi3} (nil)) ... (insn 2898 2622 2899 203 (set (reg:SI 1677) (mem/u/c:SI (symbol_ref/u:SI ("*.LC60") [flags 0x2]) [2 S4 A32])) 635 {*thumb2_movsi_vfp} (insn_list:REG_LABEL_OPERAND 1525 (expr_list:REG_EQUIV (label_ref:SI 1525) (nil)))) (insn 2899 2898 3491 203 (set (reg:SI 1678) (ior:SI (reg:SI 1677) (const_int 1 [0x1]))) 98 {*iorsi3_insn} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 1677) (nil))) (insn 3491 2899 3492 203 (set (reg:DI 1734 [orig:682 D.7985 ] [682]) (reg:DI 682 [ D.7985 ])) 636 {*movdi_vfp} (nil)) ... (jump_insn 2900 3499 2625 203 (set (pc) (reg:SI 1678)) 727 {*thumb2_indirect_jump} (expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 1678) (expr_list:REG_CROSSING_JUMP (nil) (nil)))) ... Insns 2898, 2899, and 2900 form the standard Thumb-2 indirect jump sequence. Insn 3491 is a move that has been generated as part of emit_moves in IRA for the loop it belongs to (effectively copying r682 into r1734). Now despite thinking that r1678 is live throughout insn 3491 after reload this part of the RTL dump looks like (insn 2898 2622 2899 212 (set (reg:SI 4 r4 [1677]) (mem/u/c:SI (symbol_ref/u:SI ("*.LC60") [flags 0x2]) [2 S4 A32])) 635 {*thumb2_movsi_vfp} (insn_list:REG_LABEL_OPERAND 1525 (expr_list:REG_EQUIV (label_ref:SI 1525) (nil)))) (insn 2899 2898 3491 212 (set (reg:SI 4 r4 [1678]) (ior:SI (reg:SI 4 r4 [1677]) (const_int 1 [0x1]))) 98 {*iorsi3_insn} (nil)) (insn 3491 2899 3493 212 (set (reg:DI 4 r4 [orig:682 D.7985 ] [682]) (mem/c:DI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 13 sp) (const_int 24 [0x18])) [9 %sfp+-672 S8 A64])) 636 {*movdi_vfp} (nil)) ... (jump_insn 2900 3497 2625 212 (set (pc) (reg:SI 4 r4 [1678])) 727 {*thumb2_indirect_jump} (expr_list:REG_CROSSING_JUMP (nil) (nil))) That is all of r682, r1678, and r1734 have been assigned to hard register r4. This is incorrect - as insn 2900 wants to be using r1678 from insn 2899. Looking at the logs it seems to me that r1734 because its original is r682 and that is assigned r4. The reload dump says the following about the liveness of the registers for various insns: insn=3087, live_throughout: ..., dead_or_set: 682 insn=3088, live_throughout: ..., dead_or_set: 682 insn=3089, live_throughout: ..., dead_or_set: 682 insn=2898, live_throughout: ..., 682, ..., dead_or_set: 1677 insn=2899, live_throughout: ..., 682, ..., dead_or_set: 1677, 1678 insn=3491, live_throughout: ..., 682, 1678, ..., dead_or_set: 1734 insn=2900, live_throughout: ..., 682, 1734, ..., dead_or_set: 1678 This suggests to me that the compiler should know assigning the same hard-register to r682 and r1678 is incorrect as they have overlapping live-ranges, and are not duplicates of each other. The compiler is configured as follows: Target: arm-none-linux-gnueabi Configured with: /work/sources/gcc-fsf-enable-hot-cold-partitioning/configure --target=arm-none-linux-gnueabi --prefix=/work/builds/gcc-fsf-enable-hot-cold-partitioning-arm-none-linux-gnueabi/tools --with-sysroot=/work/builds/gcc-fsf-enable-hot-cold-partitioning-arm-none-linux-gnueabi/sysroot --disable-libssp --disable-libgomp --disable-libmudflap --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --with-cpu=cortex-a9 --with-fpu=neon --with-float=softfp --enable-build-with-cxx : (reconfigured) /work/sources/gcc-fsf-enable-hot-cold-partitioning/configure --target=arm-none-linux-gnueabi --prefix=/work/builds/gcc-fsf-enable-hot-cold-partitioning-arm-none-linux-gnueabi/tools --with-sysroot=/work/builds/gcc-fsf-enable-hot-cold-partitioning-arm-none-linux-gnueabi/sysroot --disable-libssp --disable-libgomp --disable-libmudflap --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --with-cpu=cortex-a9 --with-fpu=neon --with-float=softfp --enable-build-with-cxx Thread model: posix gcc version 4.8.0 20120821 (experimental) (GCC) The gcc command line looks like: ./xgcc -B`pwd` -march=armv7-a -mtune=cortex-a9 -mthumb -mfpu=neon -mvectorize-with-neon-quad -mfloat-abi=softfp -fprofile-use=.../186.crafty -freorder-blocks-and-partition -fno-common -fdump-noaddr -O3 -dp -save-temps iterate.c -o iterate.o Does anyone have any hints as to where I should go looking? Thanks, Matt -- Matthew Gretton-Dann Linaro Toolchain Working Group matthew.gretton-dann(a)linaro.org

12 years, 9 months

Cross Compile LKM for Pandaboard ES

by Beni

First I am trying to learn and am in no way an expert. I have searched and searched for a walkthrough on how to compile LKMs for my pandaboard ES. My target is the pandaboard running Linaro 12.08. I am using Linaro toolchain binary 12.08. My confusion comes from me not knowing where the kernel sources are (really how to get them) and the target libraries. I guess what I expect is the target's rootfs with kernel source to be somewhere on my Ubuntu Host so I can link to them. I have tried the following make file configs. But obviously, I don't have the correct path for KERNDIR as I don't know if it even exists on my host. And the second make file seems like a native compile. My previous experience with buildroot: KERNDIR=/opt/buildroot/build_arm/linux-2.6.20.7/ export CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux- export ARCH=arm obj-m += pwr_led.o all: make -C $(KERNDIR) M=$(PWD) modules clean: make -C $(KERNDIR) M=$(PWD) clean Web examples: obj-m = foo.o KVERSION = $(shell uname -r) all: make -C /lib/modules/$(KVERSION)/build M=$(PWD) modules clean: make -C /lib/modules/$(KVERSION)/build M=$(PWD) clean Could you please set my head straight by pointing me to a webpage or briefly walking through the steps? Thanks, Todd

12 years, 10 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain