Hello Joel, before you start with wild guessing, please look at the patch:
https://git.rtems.org/rtems/commit/?id=b618d8cfc54f84d4ed03dc7b7fa510c872e6128a ----- Am 8. Dez 2015 um 16:45 schrieb Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org>: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Sebastian Huber < > sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > wrote: >> On 08/12/15 16:03, Joel Sherrill wrote: >>> What BSPs/architectures have you tested? >> I temporarily moved the splinkersets01 test to the samples/ticker and tested >> that all BSPs build and link this test. >> I executed the splinkersets01 test on sis, psim and arm_realview_pbx_a9_qemu. >>> Is this something that breaks on a per BSP basis? or per architecture basis? >>> I am assuming that since it is linker based, each BSP could have broken >>> linkcmds. >>> Is that right? >> It breaks on a per linker command file basis. Since all the maintained BSPs >> use >> a linkercmds.base, which shouldn't be a big issue. > That means a LOT of the BSPs are broken. Why do you think BSPs are broken? If you look at my commit, then you will see that I edited every linker command file by hand! Please note that there are no changes for the ARM (except the GBA BSP, which is a removal candidate if you ask me), SPARC and i386. They already use the linker sets for the libbsd. > You have defined maintained in your own way. You can use other definitions and end up likely with the same set of BSPs. > There are only a handful of architectures with linkcmds.base in them: > ./or1k/shared/startup/linkcmds.base > ./arm/shared/startup/linkcmds.base > ./m68k/shared/startup/linkcmds.base > ./powerpc/tqm8xx/startup/linkcmds.base > ./powerpc/gen5200/startup/linkcmds.base > ./powerpc/shared/startup/linkcmds.base > ./sparc/shared/startup/linkcmds.base > I am not sure how many BSPs within arm, m68k, or powerpc actually use the > linkcmds.base. > By my count, 13 of 94 BSP families have linkcmds.base. >> For requirements on the linker command file, see new chapter in user manual. >> However BSPs should not deal with this in copy and paste linker command files >> and instead use a linkercmds.base file. > So 85% of the BSP families don't use linkcmds.base and by the above statement, > they must immediately be migrated to linkcmds.base. No, nothing must be migrated. In fact such a migration would be very risky. You just need two section descriptions in the linker command file (see user manual chapter). > Unless you have a plan to address this problem, I am on the side of rejecting > the > part of this patch that changes the initialization. And the issue must be > addressed > before this can be merged. I am not aware of any issues, except the dependency on the GNU linker.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel