On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Am 08.10.2015 um 18:40 schrieb Khem Raj <[email protected]>: >> >>> >>> On Oct 8, 2015, at 9:07 AM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Am 08.10.2015 um 16:46 schrieb Khem Raj <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Oct 8, 2015, at 7:33 AM, Jens Rehsack <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [Icedtee Ticket #2153] -- see >>>>> http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2153 >>>>> >>>>> This patch prevents gcc generate code on ARM5e accessing 64 bit values, >>>>> because gcc doesn't ensure they're 64 bit aligned. >>>>> Accessing a 64 bit value from a 32 bit alignment causes segmentation >>>>> faults. >>>>> >>>>> Patch is taken from >>>>> https://github.com/archlinuxarm/PKGBUILDs/blob/master/core/gcc/0001-ARMv5-disable-LDRD-STRD.patch >>>> >>>> Can you try using -mfix-cortex-m3-ldrd, does that help ? >>> >>> Well, I have a marvel-kirkwood - I'll give it a shot but don't know whether >>> it works at all. >>> >>>> The patch is a workaround to gcc, as it seems real problem is in defining >>>> instruction constraints >>>> please open a gcc bug for this. >>> >>> Dunno whether I want to have all that stress. When neither ARCH linux guys >>> did that nor Icedtea >>> maintainers, how could I succeed there? >>> >>> Best I can do is (if -mfix-cortex-m3-ldrd doesn't help), keep it private. >>> When -mfix-cortex-m3-ldrd >>> helps, is adding it to ./meta/conf/machine/include/tune-arm926ejs.inc a >>> sane approach? >> >> This might be OK. Although I would like to see it fixed in right way in gcc, >> we don’t want to carry patches >> that are not accepted upstream. We already have 60 odd patches and we should >> reduce them if possible. > > I tried the approach applying -mfix-cortex-m3-ldrd to TUNE_CCARGS for > armv5+dsp - and it generates > ldrd instructions anyway. Accepted upstream or not, I have no time to get the > right upstream fix. > > So I keep it private. > > During hacking on the fix in meta/conf/machine/ I recognized that the > expected thump suffix in meta/conf/machine/include/tune-arm926ejs.inc > isn't there and modified the line as > > diff --git a/meta/conf/machine/include/tune-arm926ejs.inc > b/meta/conf/machine/include/tune-arm926ejs.inc > index 335e4e0..a310c9d 100644 > --- a/meta/conf/machine/include/tune-arm926ejs.inc > +++ b/meta/conf/machine/include/tune-arm926ejs.inc > @@ -8,4 +8,4 @@ TUNE_CCARGS .= "${@bb.utils.contains("TUNE_FEATURES", > "arm926ejs", " -mtune=arm9 > AVAILTUNES += "arm926ejs" > ARMPKGARCH_tune-arm926ejs = "arm926ejs" > TUNE_FEATURES_tune-arm926ejs = "${TUNE_FEATURES_tune-armv5te} arm926ejs" > -PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS_tune-arm926ejs = "${PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS_tune-armv5te} > arm926ejste" > +PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS_tune-arm926ejs = "${PACKAGE_EXTRA_ARCHS_tune-armv5te} > arm926ejste arm926ejse" >
this is ok ? > Want to have a patch for that or shall I keep it private, too? > > Cheers > -- > Jens Rehsack - [email protected] > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
