This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.
See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Why is this suddenly crossposted?
Sorry, that's my fault. I didn't really mean to add two linux-arm-* lists, and I cut linux-kernel (where Russell originally posted) after the first follow-up. It's copied to crossgcc because there have been a lot of inquiries (and patches posted) there relating to EABI and soft-float, and some of us who have posted there have been getting private inquiries too.
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 04:34:44AM +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > You pass your old-ABI compiler the option -mabi=aapcs-linux, which works > fine with my gcc 4.1 old-ABI toolchain and is exactly what mainline 2.6 > does.
I don't recommend doing this. The two compilers (...gnu-gcc -mabi=aapcs-linux and ...gnueabi-gcc) do not have exactly the same configuration; I don't know for sure what might be different between them, but I do know we only expect EABI compliance from the EABI compilers. -mabi=aapcs-linux versus -mabi=aapcs was mainly for interoperation between arm-none-eabi-gcc and arm-none-linux-gnueabi-gcc.
It appears to me that anything that gets functionality from libgcc would be miscompiled by an old-ABI compiler and -mabi=aapcs-linux. But Lennert is only talking about using this toolchain for cross-compiling kernels; doesn't -mabi=aapcs-linux wind up using substantially the same code generation parameters as t-linux-eabi?
Cheers, - Michael
-- For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |