linaro-toolchain

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

5599 discussions

by Thiago Jung Bauermann

Hi, GDB on Android: * Set up cross compiling environment using both the Android toolchain and the Linaro toolchain. * Tested Android and Mozilla GDB running as a native binary on the Linaro Android image on qemu. None of them were able to see all threads in a multi-threaded process. The same happens with a native binary on Android talking to a gdbserver on localhost. * I was able to produce an Android GDB 7.1.x binary which when running on an i386 host talking to the Android SDK emulator sees all threads. It is not able to generate a backtrace though. * Carnival holidays. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann Linaro Toolchain Working Group

13 years, 4 months

[ACTIVITY] 20th - 24th February

by Andrew Stubbs

Investigated and produced and patch for bug lp936863. Continued work on 64-bit shifts. I updated my neon shifts patch twice: once to take -Os optimization into account, and once because I noticed that the CC clobbers were being retained even after they were known to be not required, and presumably this could be a bad thing. Posted a patch to improve SI->DImode sign- and zero-extends that also move values from core registers to neon registers. Wrote a patch to implement negation in neon register, albeit at the cost of a scratch register to hold the constant zero. This worked, but insisted on loading the zero from memory, despite the fact that NEON has a suitable instruction for loading zero. Attempted to get "vmov dN, #0" to work. The problem appears to be that DImode loads are handled by the VFP load pattern in vfp.md and that that doesn't seem to DTRT for integer constants. I've got as far as trying to figure out what it does do, but there's more to be done to get to the bottom of the problem. Tried to get the benchmarking going for 64-bit shifts. Unfortunately ursa1 has been experiencing outages. Michael has been trying to fix it, but so far I've not been able to run anything there. Instead, I've launched benchmark runs via Michael's normal test infrastructure. Hopefully this can replace the manual ones anyway. That would be more convenient.

13 years, 4 months

Running pre-built linaro toolchain failed on Ubuntu 11.04, 64bit server

by Lv Terry-R65388

Hi, I'm trying to use pre-built version of linaro toolchain for cross-compiler in Ubuntu 11.04 on our 64bit server. I got it from http://people.linaro.org/~michaelh/incoming/binaries/. When I run arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc to compile a c source, it says "No such file or directory". The steps are as below: 1. Unpack gcc-linaro-arm-linux-gnueabi-2011.12-20111219+bzr2309~linux.tar.bz2. 2. Rename gcc-linaro-arm-linux-gnueabi-2011.12-20111219+bzr2309~linux to arm-fsl-linux-gnueabi. 3. Copy to ~/toolchain_ltib/gcc-linaro-4.6.3-glibc-2.13-singlelib-2011.12/ 2. Use arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc to compile my code. The output is: r65388@shlinux3:~/MEMCPYBM$ ~/toolchain_ltib/gcc-linaro-4.6.3-glibc-2.13-singlelib-2011.12/arm-fsl-linux-gnueabi/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -bash: /home/r65388/toolchain_ltib/gcc-linaro-4.6.3-glibc-2.13-singlelib-2011.12/arm-fsl-linux-gnueabi/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc: No such file or directory I have installed lsb 4.0 and libc6 2.13. r65388@shlinux3:~/MEMCPYBM$ dpkg -s lsb Package: lsb Status: install ok installed Priority: extra Section: misc Installed-Size: 48 Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers <ubuntu-devel-discuss(a)lists.ubuntu.com> Architecture: all Version: 4.0-0ubuntu16 ... r65388@shlinux3:~/MEMCPYBM$ dpkg -s libc6-dev Package: libc6-dev Status: install ok installed Multi-Arch: same Priority: optional Section: libdevel Installed-Size: 11888 Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers <ubuntu-devel-discuss(a)lists.ubuntu.com> Architecture: amd64 Source: eglibc Version: 2.13-20ubuntu5 Provides: libc-dev Depends: libc6 (= 2.13-20ubuntu5), libc-dev-bin (= 2.13-20ubuntu5), linux-libc-dev Recommends: gcc | c-compiler Suggests: glibc-doc, manpages-dev Breaks: binutils (<< 2.20.1-1), binutils-gold (<< 2.20.1-11), cmake (<< 2.8.4+dfsg.1-5), gcc-4.4 (<< 4.4.6-3ubuntu1), gcc-4.4-base (<< 4.4.6-3ubuntu1), gcc-4.5 (<< 4.5.3-1ubuntu2), gcc-4.5-base (<< 4.5.3-1ubuntu2), gcc-4.6 (<< 4.6.0-12), gcj-4.4-base (<< 4.4.6-2ubuntu2), gcj-4.5-base (<< 4.5.3-1ubuntu2), gnat-4.4-base (<< 4.4.6-1ubuntu3), libhwloc-dev (<< 1.2-3), libjna-java (<< 3.2.7-4), liblouis-dev (<< 2.3.0-2), liblouisxml-dev (<< 2.4.0-2), make (<< 3.81-8.1), pkg-config (<< 0.26-1) ... Do you know why? How can I fix this issue? Thanks~~ Yours Terry

13 years, 4 months

[Activity] Week 8

by Zhenqiang Chen

Summary: * Linaro binary toolchain 2012.02 release. * Try the Multilib patch on linaro toolchain. Details: 1. Linaro binary toolchain 2012.02 release. * Create linaro license file based on embedded toolchain, add crosstool-ng and sysroot (eglibc) license. * Tests on win7, oneiric and RHEL5. 2. Try to apply the multilib patch used in embedded toolchain to linaro toolchain. * The multilib solution can not work together with the multiarch patch. (1) With both patches, "gcc -print-multi-lib" can only print one option. (2) With only multilib patch, "gcc -print-multi-lib" can print the multilib list. * Successfully build a multilib toolchain (Based on the prebuilt oneiric-sysroot with directory structure change for include and lib.) without the multiarch patch and c++ support. Plans: 1. Try crosstool-ng 1.14 to build multilib eglibc. 2. Investigate how to make multiarch and multilib work together. Planed leaves: * Mar. 1-2. Best regards! -Zhenqiang

13 years, 4 months

KVM blueprints

by Michael Hope

Hi Peter, Rusty. I've written down my notes from Connect and drafted the blueprints at: https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/Q1.12ToDo I've put my priories on things and sorted them by relative importance. I'll check tomorrow if there's a good match between this, the KVMEpic spec, and the older task spreadsheet. Most of these are too short. I don't know what's involved with the CP15 work. Some still have big PENDINGS. Please edit and correct. There's a lot of work there. Some is on other teams but I'm concerned. -- Michael

13 years, 4 months

[ACTIVITY] Feb 20 - Feb 24

by Ulrich Weigand

== GCC == * Merged Ira's remaining vectorizer patches into Linaro GCC 4.7. * Merged Richard's sched-pressure patch (enabled by default on ARM) into Linaro GCC 4.7. Asked IBM colleagues for benchmark results on s390 and rs6000 as well. * Committed patch to enable vect_condition tests in FSF mainline, FSF 4.6, and Linaro GCC 4.7. * Verified that Linaro GCC 4.7 now contains every feature that was present in Linaro GCC 4.6. * Rebased and re-benchmarked fwprop-subreg patch. * Ongoing work on a patch to generate usat/ssat instructions where appropriate. * Worked on improving end-of-loop value computation. * Fixed mainline .init_array/.fini_array regression on certain newlib targets. * Reviewed several merge requests. 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

13 years, 4 months

[Activity] Week 8

by Ramana Radhakrishnan

On holiday last week and at connect week before that. ==Progress=== * Recovered from jet-lag and started to catch up on email. * Patch review week. * Cleared out a bit of my patch backlog. * Helped Asa with some bug triaging. * Read up a bit about ssat and usat and what we should be doing with other tuning for them. * Looked up some performance profiles with v8 benchmarks . Reviewed the Android benchmark numbers. * Booked tickets for connect 2012.q2 * Wrote up connect week discussions on libav regressions . === Plans === * Clear out more pending patches ( PGO next on the hit list and the vmla investigation) * Investigate partial-partial PRE results. * Finish off the ABI tests. Absences. * 1 week holiday sometime before that - to be booked. * Linaro Connect Q2.12 - May 28 - June 1

13 years, 4 months

[ACTIVITY] weekly status

by Ken Werner

Hi, OpenEmbedded: * added initial support for the Linaro GCC 4.6 based toolchain to the meta-linaro layer. * allows to build the Linaro toolchain the OE way * successfully built the core-image-sato but when running inside QEMU the GUI isn't usable (needs investigation) glibc: * built glibc+glibc-ports natively on ARM * the upstream glibc testsuite isn't aware of the multiarch paths and therefore it won't find some libs (libgcc_s, libstdc++) * workaround using symlinks; wiki updated: https://wiki.linaro.org/KenWerner/Sandbox/HowToBuildToolchainComponents#gli… Regards, Ken

13 years, 4 months

Re: gcc: Thumb interworking and weakly linked functions

by V, Aneesh

+ linaro-toolchain Hello Ulrich, I want to revisit this old thread. Sorry for the sloppy follow-up. But, this time around I have more data. On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich.Weigand(a)de.ibm.com> wrote: > Aneesh V <aneesh(a)ti.com> wrote: > >> I was trying to build u-boot in Thumb2 for OMAP4. Everything was fine >> until I added some patches recently. One of these patches introduced an >> API (let's say foo()) that has a weakly linked alias(let's say >> __foo()) and a strongly linked implementation(the real foo()) in an >> assembly file. >> >> Although I give -mthumb and -mthumb-interwork for all the files, >> apparently GCC generates ARM code for assembly files. In the final >> image foobar() calls foo() using a BL. Since foobar() is in Thumb and >> foo() in ARM, it ends up crashing. Looks like foobar() assumed foo() >> to be Thumb because __foo() is Thumb. > > I'm unable to reproduce this. Do you have a complete test case? > > I've tried with the following small example: > > foo1.c: > > extern void foo (void) __attribute__ ((weak, alias ("__foo"))); > > void __foo (void) > { > } > > int main (void) > { > foo (); > } > > foo2.S: > .text > .align 2 > .global foo > .type foo, %function > foo: > push {r7} > add r7, sp, #0 > mov sp, r7 > pop {r7} > bx lr > .size foo, .-foo > > When building just "gcc foo1.c", I get: > > 0000835c <__foo>: > 835c: b480 push {r7} > 835e: af00 add r7, sp, #0 > 8360: 46bd mov sp, r7 > 8362: bc80 pop {r7} > 8364: 4770 bx lr > 8366: bf00 nop > > 00008368 <main>: > 8368: b580 push {r7, lr} > 836a: af00 add r7, sp, #0 > 836c: f7ff fff6 bl 835c <__foo> > 8370: 4618 mov r0, r3 > 8372: bd80 pop {r7, pc} > > When building both files "gcc foo1.c foo2.S", I get instead: > > 00008368 <main>: > 8368: b580 push {r7, lr} > 836a: af00 add r7, sp, #0 > 836c: f000 e802 blx 8374 <foo> > 8370: 4618 mov r0, r3 > 8372: bd80 pop {r7, pc} > > 00008374 <foo>: > 8374: e92d0080 push {r7} > 8378: e28d7000 add r7, sp, #0 > 837c: e1a0d007 mov sp, r7 > 8380: e8bd0080 pop {r7} > 8384: e12fff1e bx lr > > > So it seems to me the linker is handling this correctly ... > > (This is on Ubuntu Natty using system gcc and binutils.) I could reproduce the problem on older tool-chain(Sourcery G++ Lite 2010q1-202) [1] with a modified version of your sample code: a.c: ==== extern void foo (void) __attribute__ ((weak, alias ("__foo"))); void __foo (void) { } extern void call_foo(void); int main (void) { call_foo (); } b.S: ==== .text .align 2 .global foo foo: push {r7} add r7, sp, #0 mov sp, r7 pop {r7} bx lr .size foo, .-foo c.S .text .align 2 .global call_foo call_foo: bl foo bx lr .global __aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0 __aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0: bx lr Now, I build them using the following commands, which is similar to what U-Boot does: arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc -mthumb -mthumb-interwork -c a.c arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc -mthumb -mthumb-interwork -c b.S arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc -mthumb -mthumb-interwork -c c.S arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld -r a.o -o alib.o arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld -r b.o -o blib.o arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld -r c.o -o clib.o arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld --start-group clib.o alib.o blib.o --end-group -o a.out armobjdump -S --reloc a.out You will get something like: 00008094 <call_foo>: 8094: fa000006 blx 80b4 <foo> 8098: e12fff1e bx lr Please note that that the 'blx' is not correct. Now, do the following change: diff --git a/b.S b/b.S index e0f2de9..96dba1f 100644 --- a/b.S +++ b/b.S @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ .text .align 2 +.type foo, %function .global foo foo: push {r7} And build it again the same way and you will see: 00008094 <call_foo>: 8094: eb000006 bl 80b4 <foo> 8098: e12fff1e bx lr I can't reproduce this on Linaro GCC 2012.01, so looks like the problem is solved in recent tool-chains. However, sadly I could reproduce a different but similar problem with Linaro GCC 2012.01. This time the call is from C(Thumb) to assembly(ARM) and no weakly linked symbols are involved. a.c: ==== int main (void) { foo (); } b.S: ==== .text .align 2 .global foo foo: push {r7} add r7, sp, #0 mov sp, r7 pop {r7} bx lr .size foo, .-foo .global __aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0 __aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0: bx lr arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -mthumb -mthumb-interwork -c a.c arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -mthumb -mthumb-interwork -c b.S arm-linux-gnueabi-ld -r a.o -o alib.o arm-linux-gnueabi-ld -r b.o -o blib.o arm-linux-gnueabi-ld --start-group alib.o blib.o --end-group -o a.out arm-linux-gnueabi-objdump -S --reloc a.out gives: 8076: af00 add r7, sp, #0 8078: f000 f802 bl 8080 <foo> 807c: 4618 mov r0, r3 It should have been "blx 8080 <foo>", isn't it? Again, %function solves it. I agree that not marking the assembly functions ' %function' is a problem in the code, so it's not a critical bug. But I would've been happier if the linker refused to link it rather than branching with the wrong instruction. Isn't that a problem? Problem No:2 ************* Linaro GCC 2012.01 is giving a new problem w.r.to Thumb build that is not existing in Sourcery G++ Lite 2010q1-202. However, I couldn't reproduce this problem with a small program like above. So, let me give you reference to the original u-boot code that shows the problem and steps to reproduce it. tree: git://github.com/aneeshv/u-boot.git branch: thumb The above branch has mainline u-boot with 4 additional patches from me for enabling Thumb build. You can build it like this: make CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- ARCH=arm distclean make CROSS_COMPILE=arm-linux-gnueabi- ARCH=arm omap4_sdp4430 This builds two images u-boot and u-boot-spl. SPL is a tiny u-boot that runs from internal RAM and loads the u-boot to SDRAM. Now, please have a look at the map file of u-boot-spl which is at: spl/u-boot-spl.map I see the following in my map file: /spl/u-boot-spl.map: ================= .rodata.wkup_padconf_array_essential_4460 0x40309583 0x4 board/ti/sdp4430/libsdp4430.o 0x40309583 wkup_padconf_array_essential_4460 .rodata.wkup_padconf_array_essential 0x40309587 0xc board/ti/sdp4430/libsdp4430.o 0x40309587 wkup_padconf_array_essential .rodata.core_padconf_array_essential 0x40309593 0x60 board/ti/sdp4430/libsdp4430.o 0x40309593 core_padconf_array_essential Please note that the .rodata symbols have odd addresses. These arrays actually need to be aligned at least to half-word boundary. In fact, in the image I verified that they are put at even addresses. So, the symbols have been kept as real address +1. I understand that this is the convention for Thumb functions. I guess the tool-chain did it for data too?? And I am getting unaligned access aborts on accessing them. I notice that this doesn't happen with all .rodata. symbols in the image. I couldn't see any difference between working and non-working files nor any difference in the command used to build them! Well, this doesn't happen if I don't use "-fdata-sections" in gcc options. So, apply the following patch and you will see that those symbols have even addresses now. diff --git a/config.mk b/config.mk index ddaa477..723286a 100644 --- a/config.mk +++ b/config.mk @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ CPPFLAGS := $(DBGFLAGS) $(OPTFLAGS) $(RELFLAGS) \ # Enable garbage collection of un-used sections for SPL ifeq ($(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD),y) -CPPFLAGS += -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections +CPPFLAGS += -ffunction-sections LDFLAGS_FINAL += --gc-sections endif /spl/u-boot-spl.map: ================= .rodata 0x40309204 0x38c board/ti/sdp4430/libsdp4430.o 0x40309204 core_padconf_array_essential 0x40309264 wkup_padconf_array_essential 0x40309270 wkup_padconf_array_essential_4460 0x40309274 core_padconf_array_non_essential 0x40309540 wkup_padconf_array_non_essential 0x40309588 wkup_padconf_array_non_essential_4430 Will you be able to look into these? Thanks, Aneesh [1] Sourcery G++ Lite 2010q1-202 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc (Sourcery G++ Lite 2010q1-202) 4.4.1 GNU ld (Sourcery G++ Lite 2010q1-202) - binutils 2.19.51.20090709 [2] Linaro 4.6-2012.01 arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-2012.01-20120125 - Linaro GCC 2012.01) 4.6.3 20120105 (prerelease) GNU ld (crosstool-NG linaro-1.13.1-2012.01-20120125 - Linaro GCC 2012.01) 2.22

13 years, 4 months

[ACTIVITY] w08

by Asa Sandahl

Hi! * Development benchmarks: Focused on the implementation of development benchmarks in the cbuild system. Discussed with Michael about how the comments should look. I am now testing my solution in the launchpad staging area. You can see a link to an example of a benchmark result comment below. (Should not be a double comment of course, and the actual result files are only stored on my machine for now.) https://code.staging.launchpad.net/~ramana/gcc-linaro/partial_partial_pre_t… The real benchmark names are not mentioned, since that might be sensitive. * Bug reports I got an action on Monday's meeting to investigate if https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.6/+bug/926855 is the same as PR52294. Investigated with help from Ramana and updated the ticket. Regards Åsa

13 years, 4 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain