On 08/29/2014 06:28 AM, Yi Qingliang wrote:
hardware: samsung s3c6410
after updated to latest poky, the boost compile fail!
error info:
libs/atomic/src/lockpool.cpp:127:5: error: 'thread_fence' is not a
member of 'boost::atomics::detail'
libs/atomic/src/lockpool.cpp:138:5: error: 'signal_fence' is not a
member of 'boost::atomics::detail'
after dig into it, I found that:
the marco 'BOOST_ATOMIC_FLAG_LOCK_FREE' is 0, so it don't include
'operations_lockfree.hpp' which has 'thread_fence' and 'signal_fence',
but pthread.h at line 21.
in file 'caps_gcc_atomic.hpp', 'BOOST_ATOMIC_FLAG_LOCK_FREE' is set to
'0', the author think if '__GCC_ATOMIC_BOOL_LOCK_FREE' is 1, the
atomic serial function gcc provided is not lock free.
This is the sort of GCC internal header indicator that would have
changed value as a result of:
http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-configure-common.inc?id=0ba6ab39f187ecd4261f08e768f365f461384a3a
at the end of 'caps_gcc_atomic.hpp', it defined
'BOOST_ATOMIC_THREAD_FENCE' as 2.
so the conflict is: *BOOST_ATOMIC_THREAD_FENCE* and
*BOOST_ATOMIC_FLAG_LOCK_FREE*
*
*
I don't know it is the new poky problem, or the boost problem, any idea?
My guess is that Boost is making assumptions about what the internal GCC
predefined symbols mean that aren't entirely accurate. There are
several flags that are used in the libstdc++ headers to indicate whether
the compiler is using lock-free instructions.
Boost-1.56 builds without error for my beaglebone target with poky at:
* 669c07d (HEAD, origin/master, origin/HEAD, master/upstream,
master/dev) [Wed Aug 27 14:24:52 2014 +0100] bitbake: build/data: Write
out more complete python run files
so it may have something to do with your target machine.
Peter
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
