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] |
Am Mo, 11.04.2011, 11:19 schrieb Bryan Hundven: > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Titus von Boxberg <titus@v9g.de> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> just in case someone is interested: >> Calling as with option -many is hardcoded in gcc. >> >> A colleague found those links which might be helpful >> for seeing the "reasoning" behind: >> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21091 >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-05/msg01244.html >> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-05/msg01247.html >> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-05/msg00376.html >> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-05/msg00357.html >> >> The problem I had was that the compiler/assemler accepts >> e.g. dcbzl for an e500v2 which leads to a SIGILL. > > Neat. I've not seen this one yet. > Do you have some example code or a test-case I could try that cause the SIGILL? asm("dcbzl 3,13"); > >> The solution for me is up to now >> - to patch away -many in gcc >> - to allow sync / eieio (in addition to equivalent msync/mbar) in as >> Â?for e500 because otherwise you cannot compile almost nothing >> Â?of the tool chain. >> >> Aditionally, in binutils 2.20 there is the mistake that >> an e500 was believed to be an e500mc (but this has apparently >> been corrected in 2.21). > > With logs located at: http://bryanhundven.com/ct-ng/powerpc-e500v2-linux-gnuspe/ > > ...I built a gcc-4.5.1/binutils-2.21/eglibc-2.12 toolchain, and I was > able to build u-boot (HEAD:17e967b) for P2020RDB board and the linux > kernel. I didn't notice any issues. > > Maybe I do not fully understand the issue you are seeing. What issue do you mean here? The problem I had is explained above: It is false permissiveness of the assembler when invoked by the compiler. Building a tool chain has not been the problem. BTW: The patched toolchain I'm using seems to work fine (up to now ;-) Regards Titus -- 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] |