On 08/30/2014 02:49 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Fri, 2014-08-29 at 22:45 -0500, Peter A. Bigot wrote:
Unlike normal builds of a gcc toolchain, OE builds the runtime libraries
separately in gcc-runtime and using the machine's tuning flags which
include the architecture. The flags affect how atomic operations are
implemented in the libraries.
Which are you trying to fix? The on target gcc or the SDK one?
On-target.
I want compiler invocations like "g++ -std=c++1y -pthread test.cc" with
the on-target OE-supplied gcc to work at least as well as the same
invocation using the same version of gcc built on-target. For this to
happen, the OE gcc default architecture must be compatible with flags
used to build the OE gcc-runtime library, just as gcc built on-target is
compatible with gcc libraries built on-target.
There are at least two ways to make that happen: change the compiler
default architecture to match the target-specific flags used for
gcc-runtime, or remove the target-specific flags when building
gcc-runtime. The latter approach makes things more consistent with how
gcc is built and used outside of OE, but is not how OE has traditionally
done things so the impact of the change might be significant. We've
been trying the former solution, which also makes the on-target compiler
generate native-optimized code by default (a bonus, fixing the bug you
mention below).
On target is harder however the on target gcc is compiled to a specific
PACKAGE_ARCH so we should be able to put specific tuning into that gcc.
It does sound like the changes to gcc-configure-common.inc were not the
way to resolve this though, I'd misunderstood what the patches were
doing.
It may still be the right way to solve it. It breaks with
meta-raspberrypi because that arm1176jzf-s is not optimally
DEFAULTTUNE="armv6" that it's currently using: -mtune=arm1176jzf-s
-march=armv6 is not the same as -mtune=arm1176jzf-s alone. It should be
DEFAULTTUNE="armv6k", but OE doesn't have that as an option. If it did
we could build gcc --with-arch=armv6k and it'd work as well as the
armv7a platforms.
Unfortunately, I think this would have to end up with creating new
armv6k-vfp-poky-linux-gnueabi packages, which probably wouldn't fly. So
it might be necessary to remove the TUNE_CCARGS flags from gcc-runtime
after all.
Can we fix this by adjusting gcc itself (the on target version)?
Maybe. It makes me uncomfortable to have the on-target compiler use
different target configuration options than the cross-compilers: I'd
expect that to produce even more hidden inconsistencies.
I suspect there are issues with statically linked SDK-built applications
with libstdc++ because the SDK gcc runtime libraries aren't built with
the same TUNE_CCARGS flags applied by gcc-runtime for the on-target
libraries, though maybe not because in that case they're built without
target-specific assumptions.
Its even a very old bug:
https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=139
but we've not actually hit issues due to this before or at least they've
not been reported in these terms.
Yes, but that bug relates to not generating target-optimized code by
default: programs work, but aren't as fast as they could be. Now that
people are using concurrent programs and the compilers are better, we're
hitting the issues related to inconsistently identifying which
instructions are available on the target.
Peter
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
