On 17 August 2013 14:36, Renato Golin renato.go...@linaro.org wrote:
On 17 August 2013 08:36, Michael Hope micha...@juju.net.nz wrote:
user/real is 3.81 so it was nicely CPU bound. The Wandboard runs at
1.0 GHz vs the U2 1.7 GHz and 142 / 1.7 = 83, which is very close to
your 80 minutes
On 13 December 2012 22:22, Ramana Radhakrishnan
ramana.radhakrish...@arm.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Michael Hope [mailto:michael.h...@linaro.org]
Sent: 12 December 2012 22:54
To: Ramana Radhakrishnan
Cc: linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
Subject: Clearing out past branches
On 11 December 2012 06:43, Marcus Shawcroft marcus.shawcr...@linaro.org wrote:
This patch adds aarch64 implementations of memcpy, memset and strcmp
to cortex strings.
Now that you've added multi-architecture support, I've added a native,
cross aarch32, and cross aarch64 build to our auto
Hi Ramana. You have the following branches remaining on Launchpad:
* lp:~ramana/gcc-linaro/47-lower-subreg-experiments
* lp:~ramana/gcc-linaro/47-improve-neon-intrinsics
* lp:~ramana/gcc-linaro/47-nobble-promote-mode
* lp:~ramana/gcc-linaro/47-smin-umin-idiom
Which are obsolete, which
The minutes of the main call held on 10 December 2012 can be found at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2012-12-10
In summary the actions from the meeting are:
* ACTION: Yvan to post mail to linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org re:
4.6 armv5 sync failures
* ACTION: Matt
On 11 December 2012 01:26, Marcus Shawcroft marcus.shawcr...@linaro.org wrote:
This patch adds --std=gnu99 to CFLAGS for the tests. This is
necessary because some of the test code use the following c99 idiom:
for (int x=)
Doesn't the -std=gnu99 in AM_CFLAGS apply to tests as well?
--
On 11 December 2012 06:41, Marcus Shawcroft marcus.shawcr...@linaro.org wrote:
Following this mornings set of patches, this patch adds configury for
aarch64 support.
Applied as bzr88. I dropped the extra parallel-tests.
-- Michael
___
On 11 December 2012 06:43, Marcus Shawcroft marcus.shawcr...@linaro.org wrote:
This patch adds aarch64 implementations of memcpy, memset and strcmp
to cortex strings.
Applied as bzr89. I shifted the implementations to src/aarch64.
-- Michael
___
On 9 December 2012 04:10, chenq chenq...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi all，
I am a rookie, and now I'm focusing on ARM virtualization.
As we know,KVM (for Kernel-based Virtual Machine) is a full virtualization
solution.
KVM-Autotest is a set of virtualization tests for X86 platform, but it may
I've done a couple of tweaks to the scheduler. You now see pending
jobs by the class of machine they'll run on. Clicking a job takes you
to the detail, which includes a link to drop/cancel the job.
-- Michael
___
linaro-toolchain mailing list
The minutes of the performance call held on 3 December 2012 can be found at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2012-12-03
In summary the actions from the meeting are:
* ACTION: Yvan will do the trunk merge this week
* ACTION: Yvan to do the GCC release next week
*
On 20 November 2012 22:10, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi,
I try ARM, MIPS, PowerPC and X86 on povray benchmark. No one can
shrink-wrap function Ray_In_Bound.
Here is:
bool Ray_In_Bound (RAY *Ray, OBJECT *Bounding_Object)
{
...
for (Bound = Bounding_Object; Bound
On 14 November 2012 22:09, Mickey Iluz mickey.i...@orcam.com wrote:
Hi Michael,
Thanks for looking into that issue. Upgrading to GCC 4.7 might be possible,
for now I've decided to remove the -funroll-loops flag, and keep working with
Freescale's GCC 4.6.2 build.
Sure. I also found that
On 9 November 2012 22:22, zhangzhangwei zhangzhang...@c-top.com wrote:
hi,
I use beaglebone ,and the CPU is AM3359 from TI
can I use the linaro toolchain to the u-Boot linux kernel and android
files?if I can ,which tool chain you suggest you use.
other question, your android realese file also
On 10 November 2012 05:11, Frank Müller franky1...@gmx.net wrote:
Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org:
My suspicion is that we/crosstool-NG enable extra features like
Graphite or GCC is built with a different level of checking. If you
I suspected Graphite as well and removed it in my own
On 12 November 2012 14:17, Mans Rullgard mans.rullg...@linaro.org wrote:
On 11 November 2012 22:18, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
On 10 November 2012 05:11, Frank Müller franky1...@gmx.net wrote:
Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org:
My suspicion is that we/crosstool-NG enable
On 5 November 2012 12:04, Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org wrote:
* Attended Linaro Connect; notable sessions:
+ Ubuntu plans for QEMU for Ringtail release
= upstream qemu has merged qemu-kvm back in so
Ubuntu will switch to qemu from qemu-kvm for x86
= also
and still get byte
accesses rather than unaligned word accesses. So this does seem to be a
v7 only issue based on what gcc will currently produce. Copying Michael
Hope who can hopefully provide some insight on why v6 unaligned accesses
are not enabled.
This looks like a bug. Unaligned access
This is the first of a few Connect follow up emails. KVM and
Cortex-A15 tuning are to come.
Matt and I have entered the initial aarch64 blueprints. These are
part of the bootstrap that clear the way for us and the community to
port packages on top.
The high priority ones are:
* Add support
On 13 October 2012 01:53, Yvan Roux yvan.r...@linaro.org wrote:
== Progress ==
* Completed Linaro ramp up process.
* Obtained my SSH security exception
* Crosstool-ng :
- Repoduced the aarch64 builds (bare and linux)
- Updated gcc to Linaro 2012.10 and submitted the merge request.
On 27 September 2012 17:48, Shivamurthy Shastri
shiva.linuxwo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 4:09 AM, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org
wrote:
On 27 September 2012 01:06, Shivamurthy Shastri
shiva.linuxwo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 6:28 PM, Fathi Boudra
On 22 September 2012 04:29, Christophe Lyon christophe.l...@linaro.org wrote:
== Progress ==
* Discussed big-endian patches for vext tests: careful review of the
specification is required and this patch might actually expose GCC
bugs in big-endian/Neon.
* builtin_bswap16:
* Posted 2
On 17 September 2012 21:21, Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org wrote:
Current Milestones:
|| || Planned|| Estimate || Actual ||
|| clean up kvm-qemu cp i/f || 2012-09-20 || 2012-09-20 ||||
|| fake-trustzone || 2012-10-15 ||
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.
On 12 September 2012 08:22, Nicolas Pitre nicolas.pi...@linaro.org wrote:
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:
On 10 September 2012 18:47, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@linaro.org wrote:
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
On 8 September 2012 02:17, Christophe Lyon christophe.l...@linaro.org wrote:
== 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.
I saw that, thanks. To finish up could
On 3 September 2012 23:05, Matthew Gretton-Dann
matthew.gretton-d...@linaro.org wrote:
Assaf,
Just to let you know that linaro-toolchain-...@lists.launchpad.net is
a closed list, a better place for this question is
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org.
On 3 September 2012 11:41, Assaf Hoffman
On 1 September 2012 03:24, Christophe Lyon christophe.l...@linaro.org wrote:
== Progress ==
* Validation of my vext patch in big-endian mode proved that proper
support would be non-trivial.
Spent a lot of time writing a self-testing executable test, which
works in both big and little endian
On 18 August 2012 12:06, Ramana Radhakrishnan
ramana.radhakrish...@linaro.org wrote:
This should have been fixed by this patch . I'm a bit surprised that
we are seeing these failures still ?
../ports/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/arm/ldsodefs.h:41:0: warning:
MORE_ELF_HEADER_DATA redefined [enabled
The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the 2012.08
release of both Linaro GCC 4.7 and Linaro GCC 4.6.
Linaro GCC 4.7 2012.08 is the fifth release in the 4.7 series. Based
off the latest GCC 4.7.1+svn189992 release, it includes many
ARM-focused performance improvements and bug
On 15 August 2012 09:56, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
On 15 August 2012 00:45, Matthew Gretton-Dann
matthew.gretton-d...@linaro.org wrote:
So looking at the logs this seems to be a transient data transfer error:
The logs
(http://builds.linaro.org/toolchain/gcc-linaro-4.7
Hi Matt. I've fleshed out the Etherpad for the PGO and LTO session at:
http://pad.linaro.org/GzRj35tXFt
It's a topic list that needs some specifics. Could you make sure we
have basic answers to any correctness or performance questions?
Ramana, could you add the specifics from the performance
On 13 August 2012 23:59, Matthew Gretton-Dann
matthew.gretton-d...@linaro.org wrote:
All,
Is there anything left to go into the branches that needs to be in the
releases this week?
I believe Uli's patches have gone in - is there anything else required?
There shouldn't be anything. In
On 10 August 2012 14:21, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
Virtual Connect is up next week. We've got two sessions lined up: the
first on profile guided optimisation and link time optimisation, and
the second on next steps with the vectoriser. Some other highlights
are the ones
Virtual Connect is up next week. We've got two sessions lined up: the
first on profile guided optimisation and link time optimisation, and
the second on next steps with the vectoriser. Some other highlights
are the ones on system trace, Dalvik, and Aarch64 via OpenEmbedded
bootstrap.
The
On 4 August 2012 00:53, Richard Earnshaw rearn...@arm.com wrote:
On 03/08/12 13:49, Mans Rullgard wrote:
I have noticed gcc has a preference for generating UXTB instructions
when an AND with #255 would do the same thing. This is bad, because
on A9 UXTB has two cycles latency compared to one
For reference, if you see link time errors about a missing
'__dso_handle' symbol when building Android, then check if you're
using any global class instances in your multimedia libraries.
Each shared library has a __dso_handle symbol which is filled in on
load by the dynamic loader. Global class
On 7 July 2012 05:43, Ramana Radhakrishnan
ramana.radhakrish...@linaro.org wrote:
On 6 July 2012 00:10, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi Ramana. These are covered by the release process documentation but
I thought I'd fill them out.
I've found another flaw with the script which
On 25 July 2012 23:56, Ramana Radhakrishnan
ramana.radhakrish...@linaro.org wrote:
On 25 July 2012 05:16, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
FYI GCC trunk r189808 fails to build with a bootstrap comparison error:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
warning
a cbuild (https://launchpad.net/cbuild) based
bot which is administered by Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org.
___
linaro-toolchain mailing list
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
On 16 July 2012 13:51, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
We've just started running a weekly benchmark of GCC trunk and Linaro
GCC tip. I've written a short script that compares against a baseline
and spits out a graph:
http://ex.seabright.co.nz/benchmarks/gcc-4.8~svn.png
http
On 19 July 2012 04:31, Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
Here's the details:
* The test is fine when built from the command line
This is weird in particular. It probably means that you built it in
a way where it picks up system
Hi Ramana, Ulrich. Could I have some help with an unexpected
testsuite failure while backporting Carrot's adddi patch?
testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-7.c builds and runs but aborts during
leave() due to unexpected results.
The merge request is here:
On 17 July 2012 05:51, William Mills wmi...@ti.com wrote:
On 07/15/2012 09:51 PM, Michael Hope wrote:
We've just started running a weekly benchmark of GCC trunk and Linaro
GCC tip. I've written a short script that compares against a baseline
and spits out a graph:
http
We've just started running a weekly benchmark of GCC trunk and Linaro
GCC tip. I've written a short script that compares against a baseline
and spits out a graph:
http://ex.seabright.co.nz/benchmarks/gcc-4.8~svn.png
http://ex.seabright.co.nz/benchmarks/gcc-linaro-4.7%2bbzr.png
I'll switch the
.
Matthias
revno: 115001 [merge]
committer: Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org
branch nick: 4.7
timestamp: Tue 2012-07-03 20:16:55 +1200
message:
Merge from FSF (GCC SVN branches/gcc-4_7-branch:189098)
added:
gcc/config.gcc.rej
gcc/config/arm/arm.c.orig
gcc/config/arm/arm.c.rej
gcc
On 29 June 2012 23:07, Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
linaro-toolchain-boun...@lists.linaro.org wrote on 29.06.2012 12:19:52:
For Uli's merge request, there is only one new UNSUPPORTED:
-PASS: gcc.dg/simulate-thread/atomic-other-int.c -O0 -g thread simulation
test
On 29 June 2012 15:13, Xiao Jiang jgq...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I tried codesourcy
arm-2012.03-57-arm-none-linux-gnueabi-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.bz2, and get
below err infos.
Error: selected processor does not support ARM mode `sdiv R2,R0,R1'
Error: selected processor does not support ARM
On 29 June 2012 15:46, Xiao Jiang jgq...@gmail.com wrote:
Michael Hope wrote:
On 29 June 2012 15:13, Xiao Jiang jgq...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I tried codesourcy
arm-2012.03-57-arm-none-linux-gnueabi-i686-pc-linux-gnu.tar.bz2, and get
below err infos.
Error: selected processor does
I've gone through and checked the 64 bit operation improvements that
Andrew has made to GCC. For everything but the Cortex-A8, GCC uses
the NEON unit for 64 bit operations and Andrew's improvements mean we
can stay on NEON for longer without having an expensive transfer back
and forth to the core
On 18 June 2012 21:14, Marius Cetateanu m...@softkinetic.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to build some shared libraries with the Linaro Android toolchain.
For all of my libraries I get the following errors from the linker:
|BlaBla.cpp.o: requires unsupported dynamic reloc R_ARM_REL32; recompile
On 15 June 2012 01:22, Tom Deblauwe tom.debla...@traficon.com wrote:
Hello,
I am wondering if there is support for gettext in the linaro toolchain? How
can I check it if it should work or not?
I can compile and link the setlocale() and bindtextdomain() and
textdomain() functions, however,
On 11 June 2012 21:53, Mans Rullgard mans.rullg...@linaro.org wrote:
On 11 June 2012 02:14, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
We talked at Connect about finishing up the cortex-strings work by
upstreaming them into Bionic, Newlib, and GLIBC. I've written up one
of our standard
The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the 2012.06
release of both Linaro GCC 4.7 and Linaro GCC 4.6.
Linaro GCC 4.7 2012.06 is the third release in the 4.7 series. Based
off the latest GCC 4.7.0+svn188038 release, it includes performance
improvements especially around 64 bit
On 12 June 2012 18:53, Akash D aka...@renuelectronics.com wrote:
Hello Michael,
Thanks for reply.
The required information is mentioned below.
Compiler Used ---
http://launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded
Version number
arm-none-eabi-gcc (GNU Tools for ARM Embedded Processors) 4.6.2
On 8 June 2012 17:23, Akash D aka...@renuelectronics.com wrote:
Hello Sir/Madam,
I am using MK60FN1M0VLQ12 (COTREX-M4) processor for my development.
I am using float and double data types in my code. When I perform any
mathematical operation on these variables, the processor goes to Hard
We talked at Connect about finishing up the cortex-strings work by
upstreaming them into Bionic, Newlib, and GLIBC. I've written up one
of our standard 'Output' pages:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Outputs/CortexStrings
with a summary of what we did, what else exists,
On 2 June 2012 04:14, Ken Werner ken.wer...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi,
OpenEmbedded-Core/meta-linaro:
* added a default xorg.conf for the qemuarmv7a MACHINE
* necessary because OE-Core master switched from Xfbdev to Xorg
* noticed that hard float with Linaro GCC 4.6 works on denzil but is
Hi Peter, Riku. I've written up a page covering the KVM integration
work done this quarter at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Outputs/KVMIntegration
Could you review it please, including the instructions at:
The Precise based hard float auto builders are now online. Every
merge request and commit to gcc-linaro will now be built build both on
a Natty softfp system and a Precise hard float. Let's run this in
parallel for a while before updating the validation lab.
I've also updated the x86 cloud
On 22 May 2012 17:34, Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 17.05.2012 10:29, Michael Hope wrote:
sorry, unimplemented: Thumb-1 hard-float VFP ABI errors: tests where
they set the architecture to ARMv5T and use our default Thumb mode.
This causes the compiler to fail as it doesn't support
Here's my list of things I'd like to knock off during Connect:
https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/Q2.12Plans
Have a think about specific things you'd like to achieve as I'll be
asking on Monday.
-- Michael
___
linaro-toolchain mailing list
On 17 May 2012 18:23, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@linaro.org wrote:
Some are marked as unsupported but shouldn't be:
+UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-11a.c
+UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-11b.c
+UNSUPPORTED: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/gen-vect-11.c
+UNSUPPORTED:
Hi Ramana. FYI, gcc trunk fails to bootstrap with:
../../../../gcc-4.8~/libgcc/libgcc2.c: In function '__mulvdi3':
../../../../gcc-4.8~/libgcc/libgcc2.c:397:1: internal compiler error:
in df_uses_record, at df-scan.c:3179
A cross compiler fails when building EEMBC with:
(insn 1166 1165 1167
The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the 2012.05
release of both Linaro GCC 4.7 and Linaro GCC 4.6.
Linaro GCC 4.7 2012.05 is the second release in the 4.7 series. Based
off the latest GCC 4.7.0+svn187448 release, it includes performance
improvements especially around 64 bit
There will be no release of Linaro GDB this month. We're busy working
on upstreaming Android support and will backport them as they come
ready.
-- Michael
___
linaro-toolchain mailing list
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
Hi Zhenqiang. I've had a look at the difference between testsuite
results on our current softfp Natty builders and the new hard float
Precise builders. The diff and notes is at:
http://people.linaro.org/~michaelh/incoming/hard-float-builder-diff.txt
There's a lot of commonality:
/usr/bin/ld:
On 11 May 2012 04:31, Ken Werner ken.wer...@linaro.org wrote:
On 05/10/2012 04:27 AM, Michael Hope wrote:
Hi Ken. I've checked in a rough script that builds OpenEmbedded
inside the cbuild Makefile-based auto builders.
To run it yourself:
* bzr branch lp:cbuild
* cd cbuild
* cp
Hi Ken. I've checked in a rough script that builds OpenEmbedded
inside the cbuild Makefile-based auto builders.
To run it yourself:
* bzr branch lp:cbuild
* cd cbuild
* cp oecore.mk lib
* mkdir -p slaves/`hostname`
* cd slaves/`hostname`
* make -f ../../lib/oecore.mk
It's a Makefile which
On 9 May 2012 12:14, Michael Hudson-Doyle michael.hud...@canonical.com wrote:
On Tue, 8 May 2012 15:56:27 +1200, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org
wrote:
On 7 May 2012 20:10, Zygmunt Krynicki zygmunt.kryni...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi.
We'll see some beta deployments this week. I have
On 7 May 2012 20:22, Ken Werner ken.wer...@linaro.org wrote:
On 05/07/2012 04:07 AM, Michael Hope wrote:
On 5 May 2012 03:40, Ken Wernerken.wer...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi,
OpenEmbedded-Core/meta-linaro:
* created meta-linaro denzil branch to be used in conjunction with the
oe
release
. Do you have documentation or a specification you're working to?
Does your plan cover my needs or something close to it?
Thanks
ZK
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi there. We'd like to run a Fast Model in the validation lab for KVM
testing
Hi there. Let's bump the Monday meeting to Tuesday due to the UK bank holiday.
I'll update the invite,
-- Michael
___
linaro-toolchain mailing list
linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-toolchain
I've lost track of the benchmark builds so I've started a manual todo list at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/Todo
It's been messy with the validation lab being down and some builds
being in my home office and some in Cambridge. Let me know if I'm
missing any.
-- Michael
On 5 May 2012 03:40, Ken Werner ken.wer...@linaro.org wrote:
Hi,
OpenEmbedded-Core/meta-linaro:
* created meta-linaro denzil branch to be used in conjunction with the oe
release
Yocto 1.2 is out and this branch seem pretty quiet. Any idea when
they'll tag/release?
* added a patch that
I thought I'd send an update on the SPEC 2000 twolf variance. We're
seeing a high amount of variance in the results for the SPEC 2000
twolf, vpr, and galgel benchmarks. I've run tests on a PandaBoard,
Origen, and IGEPv2 and gotten a coefficent of variance of 0.014,
0.017, and 0.003 which
On 27 April 2012 11:59, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
On 23 April 2012 14:23, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/22/2012 06:06 PM, Michael Hope wrote:
On 21 April 2012 09:10, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey everyone,
Following up here. Where do we stand? We need
On 30 April 2012 23:45, Marcin Juszkiewicz
marcin.juszkiew...@canonical.com wrote:
W dniu 27.04.2012 03:30, Michael Hope pisze:
Hi Marcin. I've had a look at nano-dev. Please:
* Change the top directory from binary/boot/filesystem.dir/ to libc/
Will do.
* Remove etc
* Remove sbin
On 28 April 2012 21:34, Zhenqiang Chen zhenqiang.c...@linaro.org wrote:
Summary:
* Linaro binary toolchain 2012.04 release.
* Code size benchmark analysis.
Details:
1. Validate and bug fix for linaro binary toolchain 2012.04 release.
2. Investigate code size regressions in 4.7
Find more
On 23 April 2012 14:23, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/22/2012 06:06 PM, Michael Hope wrote:
On 21 April 2012 09:10, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey everyone,
Following up here. Where do we stand? We need to have upstream patches
before we can pull them into the distro
On 24 April 2012 21:03, Marcin Juszkiewicz
marcin.juszkiew...@canonical.com wrote:
I added Ubuntu 12.04 'precise' based sysroots to Jenkins yesterday. They
are built using 'armhf' architecture and available in three flavours:
- alip
- nano
- ubuntu-desktop
So far only -dev ones are
The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the 2012.04
release of the Linaro Toolchain Binaries, a pre-built version of
Linaro GCC and Linaro GDB that runs on generic Linux or Windows and
targets the glibc Linaro Evaluation Build.
Uses include:
* Cross compiling ARM applications
We use QEMU to test programs built by the toolchain binary release for
correctness. I've written up the instructions for spinning up your
own at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/MichaelHope/Sandbox/QEMUCrossTest
It's focused on simplicity - getting a running, SSH only Cortex-A9 up
and going as soon as
The EEMBC supplied build system has a couple of bugs with library
order (putting -lrt at the start of the command line instead of the
end) and the harness library (depending on THOBJS but linking against
THLIB). I've fixed these and pushed to our private branch.
Ulrich, I've spawned builds of
On 21 April 2012 09:10, Jon Masters j...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey everyone,
Following up here. Where do we stand? We need to have upstream patches
before we can pull them into the distro - is that piece done?
Hi Jon. I've been away, sorry. I've just sent the GCC patch and
Carlos is on the hook
On 20 April 2012 22:26, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I have been using CodeSourcery tool-chains since forever, and I
decided to try Linaro's tool-chain. So far I haven't had any issues,
except one:
libgcc_s.so.1 is located in arm-linux-gnueabi/lib, which is not
On 12 April 2012 04:21, Mans Rullgard mans.rullg...@linaro.org wrote:
On 11 April 2012 16:16, Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
Singh, Ravi Kumar (Ravi) ravi.si...@lsi.com wrote:
Are there any pragmas for selectively disabling (in one chunk of
code) the vectorization, when its
On 12 April 2012 10:38, Steve McIntyre steve.mcint...@linaro.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 02:06:09AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
And here's the details as promised.
I've started a wiki page at
https://wiki.linaro.org/OfficeofCTO/HardFloat/LinkerPathCallApr2012
with a strawman agenda
2012/4/12 Paulo César Pereira de Andrade
paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com:
Em 11 de abril de 2012 20:22, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org escreveu:
On 12 April 2012 10:38, Steve McIntyre steve.mcint...@linaro.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 02:06:09AM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote
2012/4/12 Paulo César Pereira de Andrade
paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com:
Em 11 de abril de 2012 21:16, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org escreveu:
2012/4/12 Paulo César Pereira de Andrade
paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com:
Em 11 de abril de 2012 20:22, Michael Hope
The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the 2012.04
release of both Linaro GCC 4.7 and Linaro GCC 4.6.
Linaro GCC 4.7 2012.04 is the first release in the 4.7 series. Based
off the latest GCC 4.7.0+svn186061 release, it includes performance
improvements especially around 64 bit
On 10 April 2012 23:55, Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
Michael Hope wrote:
Ulrich, I see your fix for LP: #968766 has been approved upstream. In
theory it's too late but I'm happy to land it if you are. Could you
decide and let Andrew know by the middle of Tuesday? Andrew
Hi there. The 2012.04 toolchain release is this week.
Ulrich, I see your fix for LP: #968766 has been approved upstream. In
theory it's too late but I'm happy to land it if you are. Could you
decide and let Andrew know by the middle of Tuesday? Andrew, if you
don't hear from Ulrich then spin
On 2 April 2012 08:18, Michael Hope michael.h...@linaro.org wrote:
On 1 April 2012 05:56, Ramana Radhakrishnan
ramana.radhakrish...@linaro.org wrote:
I find it a bit worrying that all the nptl tests are failing with a
common error message
http://builds.linaro.org/toolchain/eglibc-2.16
On 1 April 2012 05:56, Ramana Radhakrishnan
ramana.radhakrish...@linaro.org wrote:
I find it a bit worrying that all the nptl tests are failing with a
common error message
http://builds.linaro.org/toolchain/eglibc-2.16~svn17843
Aborted'
make[6]: ***
I've changed the development focus in the Launchpad project to Linaro
GCC 4.7. This means that:
* Checking out lp:gcc-linaro now gives you the 4.7 branch
* New merge requests are targeted to 4.7 by default
This doesn't affect any already checked out branches or pending merge requests.
--
...is up at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2012-04-02
Feel free to add items. Andrew, could you look into the 4.7 bzr merge
problem before then?
-- Michael
___
linaro-toolchain mailing list
On 29 March 2012 00:02, Andrew Stubbs andrew.stu...@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue 27 Mar 2012 22:03:45 BST, Michael Hope wrote:
The PandaBoard auto builders are having a hard time keeping with
longer build and test times of 4.7 and the re-enabled libstdc++ tests.
For reference, here's how much
On 27 March 2012 00:50, Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
Hi Michael,
I'm seeing what looks like bogus testsuite failures again:
https://code.launchpad.net/~uweigand/gcc-linaro/lp-960283-4.7/+merge/99069
I suspect this is still caused by the .ident version string, which now
1 - 100 of 352 matches
Mail list logo
