This is the mail archive of the
libc-ports@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Re: [PATCH] tile: improve detection for missing -mcmodel=large support
- From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf at tilera dot com>
- To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: <libc-ports at sourceware dot org>, "David S. Miller" <davem at davemloft dot net>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 22:05:39 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] tile: improve detection for missing -mcmodel=large support
- References: <201305231925 dot r4NJPPJG013785 at farm-0002 dot internal dot tilera dot com> <519E9585 dot 1090904 at redhat dot com>
(Adding David explicitly to Cc.)
On 5/23/2013 6:17 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 05/23/2013 03:20 PM, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>> The existing test avoided passing -mcmodel=large if the compiler didn't
>> support it. However, we need to test not just the compiler support, but
>> also the toolchain (as and ld) support, so make the test more complete.
>> In addition, we have to avoid using the hwN_plt() assembly operators if
>> that support is missing, so guard the uses with #ifdef NO_PLT_PCREL.
>>
>> This allows us to properly build glibc with the current community
>> binutils, which doesn't yet have the PC-relative PLT operator support.
>> The -mcmodel=large support is in gcc 4.8, but the toolchain support
>> won't be present in the community until binutils 2.24.
>> ---
>> This change should also be applied on the 2.17 release branch for
>> when we release a 2.17.1.
> No, just backport it immediately after checkin to master. The 2.17
> branch *is* 2.17.1 in development and when we get enough changes in
> that branch we cut it and make a 2.17.1 release.
>
> You need release manager ACK though, which is David Miller. We normally
> handle backports via bugzilla bugs with keyword glibc_2.17, but it
> can be less formal if you just CC David and ask for ACK.
David, is it OK if I backport this to the 2.17 branch after I commit? Do you want a BZ# to track it?
--
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com