On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:16 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:11 PM, Andre McCurdy <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:06 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:00 PM, Andre McCurdy <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:55 PM, Khem Raj <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andre McCurdy <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 3:50 PM, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:40:53PM -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> > see >>>>>>>> > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2018-May/150654.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Removing -fno-omit-frame-pointer isn't the same as adding >>>>>>>> -fomit-frame-pointer. Frame pointers may get enabled depending on the >>>>>>>> optimisation level etc (ie not only by -fno-omit-frame-pointer). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Should I send v2 adding -fomit-frame-pointer instead of removing >>>>>>> -fno-omit-frame-pointer? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The v1 fixes the issue for me with default config + DEBUG_BUILD. >>>>>> >>>>>> The v1 patch isn't wrong, it's just incomplete (the problem could come >>>>>> back if someone changes optimisation level or switches gcc to clang, >>>>>> etc). >>>>>> >>>>>> My choice would be a v2 patch which adds -fomit-frame-pointer to >>>>>> CFLAGS unconditionally for all ARM builds when Thumb is enabled. That >>>>>> should fix the problem for all optimisation levels etc and avoids >>>>>> building the main strace binary differently depending on whether or >>>>>> not ptest is enabled. >>>>> >>>>> explicitly adding this option is a poor choice especially for debug >>>>> builds where we should >>>>> let the -On level decide and not explicitly ask for either >>>>> enable/disable frame-pointers >>>>> that will also make it compiler proof. >>>> >>>> Of course, we should let the compiler decide whenever it's possible to do >>>> so. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately there are cases like this one where frame pointers clash >>>> with inline assembler and we need to over-rule the compiler's choice. >>> >>> Here we are adding -fno-omit-frame-pointer via global opt flags that >>> is the issue >>> where we have fallouts from default O options I agree we should teach >>> this to build >>> system and help the compiler >> >> Since there's NO situation where enabling frame pointers is going to >> work for this code + ARM + Thumb, I don't see the advantage of leaving >> anything up to chance. Just explicitly disabling frame pointers is the >> safest and cleanest option. > > In that case what we are saying is that strace has wrong assumptions > I would think its best to change strace build system to demand this > option override instead of injecting it externally.
There are many possible / better fixes if we want to patch the strace sources or Makefiles. I'm not sure if Martin was signing up for that though :-) -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
