Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-12-01 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de 
 [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
 Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 7:56 PM
 To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
  -Original Message-
  From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de 
  [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
  Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:38 PM
  To: Wolfgang Denk
  Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
  Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
  
 
 [snip]...[snip]
 
   
 I am process of downloading the 2009q3 version from 
   codesourcery
 Albert mentioned he is using it. Are you on the same 
  version as
 well?
   
   No, I'm using ELDk 4.2
  
  [sp] Okay, so I downloaded both 2009-q3 and 2010.09-50 
 versions of the
   Codesourcery Lite edition.
   
   There is no difference in the observations between 
  2009q3 and 2010q1.
  

[snip]...[snip]

There were some good patches posted recently esp the bss_debug
tool and fix for ARM relocation from Andreas. Applied them in
order to get more information.

In addition, added print indicating the function being called
in for (init_funcptr= ) loop within board_init_f().

Also added a print in the function omap3_evm_get_revision() just
to see if it ever gets called in due to incorrect sequencing.

I could confirm that functions in init_sequence[] are called
and omap3_evm_get_revision() is not called in this sequence.

When everything failed, I went back to the u-boot.lds and
changed the way overlay is defined.

...AND PROBLEM SEEMS TO BE SOLVED!

I can now compile u-boot with both 2009q1 and 2010q1 without
any error. (yet to try with 2010.09)

To verify, I wanted to do a before-and-after comparison but
couldn't have done for the omap3_evm - used omap3_beagle instead.

I haven't yet tried running the binary on the board; but here
are top level observations:

1) .bss and .rel.dyn are starting at same address.
2) The size of .rodata has increased. (Why? not yet spent time on?)

Sending the patch in next few mins:

~sanjeev

(Comparison: before and after)

753c753
 .rodata 0x80035578 0x9f38
---
 .rodata 0x80035578 0x9f46
757c757
  .rodata0x8003571c   0xbc arch/arm/lib/libarm.o
---

=== [contents deleted] ===

 .u_boot_cmd 0x80041aac  0x658
---
 .u_boot_cmd 0x80041abc  0x658

=== [contents deleted] ===

967,968c967,973
 .rel.dyn0x80042104 0x5af0
 0x80042104__rel_dyn_start = .
---
 .dynsym 0x80042114   0xa0
 0x80042114__dynsym_start = .
  *(.dynsym)
  .dynsym0x80042114   0xa0 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.o
 
 .rel.dyn0x800421b4 0x5af0
 0x800421b4__rel_dyn_start = .

=== [contents deleted] ===

984,985c986,987
 .bss0x800421040x31ba8
 0x80042104__bss_start = .
---
 .bss0x800421b40x31bb4 load address 0x80047ca4
 0x80073d68__bss_start = .

=== [contents deleted] ===

 .dynbss 0x80073cac0x0
---
 .dynbss 0x80073d680x0 load address 0x80079858

___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-12-01 Thread Albert ARIBAUD 
Le 01/12/2010 15:56, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :

 When everything failed, I went back to the u-boot.lds and
 changed the way overlay is defined.

 ...AND PROBLEM SEEMS TO BE SOLVED!

This most probably means some of the code running before relocation uses 
BSS; see below.

 I can now compile u-boot with both 2009q1 and 2010q1 without
 any error. (yet to try with 2010.09)

 To verify, I wanted to do a before-and-after comparison but
 couldn't have done for the omap3_evm - used omap3_beagle instead.

 I haven't yet tried running the binary on the board; but here
 are top level observations:

 1) .bss and .rel.dyn are starting at same address.

This is normal and should not have any negative impact as long as code 
that runs before relocation does not access BSS -- and it should not, 
since BSS only exists after relocation.

 2) The size of .rodata has increased. (Why? not yet spent time on?)

Weird. Can you provide all necessary info for duplicating these two builds?

 Sending the patch in next few mins:

If that's a patch to remove the overlay in the .lds, it's a Nak from me 
already.

 ~sanjeev

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-12-01 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr] 
 Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 8:33 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; Wolfgang Denk
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Le 01/12/2010 15:56, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
 
  When everything failed, I went back to the u-boot.lds and
  changed the way overlay is defined.
 
  ...AND PROBLEM SEEMS TO BE SOLVED!
 
 This most probably means some of the code running before 
 relocation uses 
 BSS; see below.
 
  I can now compile u-boot with both 2009q1 and 2010q1 without
  any error. (yet to try with 2010.09)
 
  To verify, I wanted to do a before-and-after comparison but
  couldn't have done for the omap3_evm - used omap3_beagle instead.
 
  I haven't yet tried running the binary on the board; but here
  are top level observations:
 
  1) .bss and .rel.dyn are starting at same address.
 
 This is normal and should not have any negative impact as 
 long as code 
 that runs before relocation does not access BSS -- and it should not, 
 since BSS only exists after relocation.

[sp] Yes. This is what I wanted to confirm to ensure that relocation
 isn't breaking after the changes. In a way it was my testcase
 to see that I get similar map for omap3_beagle before and after
 making changes.
 
  2) The size of .rodata has increased. (Why? not yet spent time on?)
 
 Weird. Can you provide all necessary info for duplicating 
 these two builds?
 
  Sending the patch in next few mins:
 
 If that's a patch to remove the overlay in the .lds, it's a 
 Nak from me 
 already.

[sp] No. I am not removing relocation. Do look at the patch.
 I just sent from my Linux box..

 
  ~sanjeev
 
 Amicalement,
 -- 
 Albert.
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-30 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de 
 [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
 Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:38 PM
 To: Wolfgang Denk
 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 

[snip]...[snip]

  
I am process of downloading the 2009q3 version from 
  codesourcery
Albert mentioned he is using it. Are you on the same 
 version as
well?
  
  No, I'm using ELDk 4.2
 
 [sp] Okay, so I downloaded both 2009-q3 and 2010.09-50 versions of the
  Codesourcery Lite edition.
  
  There is no difference in the observations between 
 2009q3 and 2010q1.
 
[sp] I have been able to narrow down the problem to one variable defined
 in board/ti/evm.c - omap3_evm_version - declared as:
  static u8 omap3_evm_version;

 Any attempt to assign value this variable in omap3_evm_get_revision()
 leads to the linker error I noted with Codesourcery 2010q1-202.
 
 With 2009q1-203, definition of variable itself is sufficient to cause
 the linker error.

 I have pasted a patch below that constructs the testcase I have created
 to explain these observations:
 1) When macros both _EXCLUDE_ME_1 and _EXCLUDE_ME_2 are undefined, the
problem is - as described.

 2) When only macro _EXCLUDE_ME_1 is defined, the compilation succeeds
with Codesourcery 2010q1-202; but fails with 2009q1-203.

 3) When both macros _EXCLUDE_ME_1 and _EXCLUDE_ME_2 are defined, the
compilation succeeds with both codesourcery versions.

 OMAP3EVM is obviously not the only file using statics. I see their usage
 in many files including OMAP3Beagle as well - one reason I did not even
 suspect this to be problem.

 I haven't yet been able to conclude the cause of failure - but appears
 to be related to handling of static variables across compiler versions.
 Still need to investigate further on this...

 Board revision needs to be detected early during initialization. How is
 this handled for other boards? (I am currently trying to browse non-omap
 boards for pointers). Any quick suggestions would be helpful.

[patch]
diff --git a/board/ti/evm/evm.c b/board/ti/evm/evm.c
index 09d14f7..e766355 100644
--- a/board/ti/evm/evm.c
+++ b/board/ti/evm/evm.c
@@ -37,15 +37,30 @@
 #include asm/mach-types.h
 #include evm.h
 
+/* #define _EXCLUDE_ME_1 *//* Uncomment - works with 2010q1 only */
+/* #define _EXCLUDE_ME_2 *//* Uncomment - works with 2009q3 as well */
+
+#if !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_2)
 static u8 omap3_evm_version;
+#endif
 
 u8 get_omap3_evm_rev(void)
 {
+#ifdef _EXCLUDE_ME_2
+   return OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_1; /* Debugging: Don't use the variable */
+#else
return omap3_evm_version;
+#endif
+
 }
 
 static void omap3_evm_get_revision(void)
 {
+#ifdef _EXCLUDE_ME_COMPLETELY_
+   /*
+* Original code in the function is being removed completely to reduce
+* scope of the debug exercise.
+*/
 #if defined(CONFIG_CMD_NET)
/*
 * Board revision can be ascertained only by identifying
@@ -80,6 +95,20 @@ static void omap3_evm_get_revision(void)
omap3_evm_version = OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_2;
 #endif
 #endif /* CONFIG_CMD_NET */
+
+#else
+   /*
+* Dummy implementation of function just for testing
+*/
+
+#if !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_1)  !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_2)
+   /*
+* Dummy assignment just for testing
+*/
+   omap3_evm_version = OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_2;
+#endif
+
+#endif /* _EXCLUDE_ME_COMPLETELY_ */
 }
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_USB_OMAP3
[/patch]

[snip]
Removed my observations for Codesourcery 2010.09-50.
Did not get chance to look at them so far...
[/snip]

Best regards,
Sanjeev
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-30 Thread Dirk Behme 
On 30.11.2010 15:25, Premi, Sanjeev wrote:
 -Original Message-
 From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de
 [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
 Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:38 PM
 To: Wolfgang Denk
 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain


 [snip]...[snip]


   I am process of downloading the 2009q3 version from
 codesourcery
   Albert mentioned he is using it. Are you on the same
 version as
   well?

 No, I'm using ELDk 4.2

 [sp] Okay, so I downloaded both 2009-q3 and 2010.09-50 versions of the
   Codesourcery Lite edition.

   There is no difference in the observations between
 2009q3 and 2010q1.

 [sp] I have been able to narrow down the problem to one variable defined
   in board/ti/evm.c - omap3_evm_version - declared as:
static u8 omap3_evm_version;

   Any attempt to assign value this variable in omap3_evm_get_revision()
   leads to the linker error I noted with Codesourcery 2010q1-202.

   With 2009q1-203, definition of variable itself is sufficient to cause
   the linker error.

Maybe CCing Codesourcery's mailing list

http://www.codesourcery.com/archives/arm-gnu-discuss/maillist.html

could help, too? At least it's worth a try?

Dirk

   I have pasted a patch below that constructs the testcase I have created
   to explain these observations:
   1) When macros both _EXCLUDE_ME_1 and _EXCLUDE_ME_2 are undefined, the
  problem is - as described.

   2) When only macro _EXCLUDE_ME_1 is defined, the compilation succeeds
  with Codesourcery 2010q1-202; but fails with 2009q1-203.

   3) When both macros _EXCLUDE_ME_1 and _EXCLUDE_ME_2 are defined, the
  compilation succeeds with both codesourcery versions.

   OMAP3EVM is obviously not the only file using statics. I see their usage
   in many files including OMAP3Beagle as well - one reason I did not even
   suspect this to be problem.

   I haven't yet been able to conclude the cause of failure - but appears
   to be related to handling of static variables across compiler versions.
   Still need to investigate further on this...

   Board revision needs to be detected early during initialization. How is
   this handled for other boards? (I am currently trying to browse non-omap
   boards for pointers). Any quick suggestions would be helpful.

 [patch]
 diff --git a/board/ti/evm/evm.c b/board/ti/evm/evm.c
 index 09d14f7..e766355 100644
 --- a/board/ti/evm/evm.c
 +++ b/board/ti/evm/evm.c
 @@ -37,15 +37,30 @@
   #includeasm/mach-types.h
   #include evm.h

 +/* #define _EXCLUDE_ME_1 */  /* Uncomment - works with 2010q1 only */
 +/* #define _EXCLUDE_ME_2 */  /* Uncomment - works with 2009q3 as well */
 +
 +#if !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_2)
   static u8 omap3_evm_version;
 +#endif

   u8 get_omap3_evm_rev(void)
   {
 +#ifdef _EXCLUDE_ME_2
 + return OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_1; /* Debugging: Don't use the variable */
 +#else
   return omap3_evm_version;
 +#endif
 +
   }

   static void omap3_evm_get_revision(void)
   {
 +#ifdef _EXCLUDE_ME_COMPLETELY_
 + /*
 +  * Original code in the function is being removed completely to reduce
 +  * scope of the debug exercise.
 +  */
   #if defined(CONFIG_CMD_NET)
   /*
* Board revision can be ascertained only by identifying
 @@ -80,6 +95,20 @@ static void omap3_evm_get_revision(void)
   omap3_evm_version = OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_2;
   #endif
   #endif  /* CONFIG_CMD_NET */
 +
 +#else
 + /*
 +  * Dummy implementation of function just for testing
 +  */
 +
 +#if !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_1)  !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_2)
 + /*
 +  * Dummy assignment just for testing
 +  */
 + omap3_evm_version = OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_2;
 +#endif
 +
 +#endif   /* _EXCLUDE_ME_COMPLETELY_ */
   }

   #ifdef CONFIG_USB_OMAP3
 [/patch]

 [snip]
 Removed my observations for Codesourcery 2010.09-50.
 Did not get chance to look at them so far...
 [/snip]

 Best regards,
 Sanjeev
 ___
 U-Boot mailing list
 U-Boot@lists.denx.de
 http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot


___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-30 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Dirk Behme [mailto:dirk.be...@googlemail.com] 
 Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:15 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
 On 30.11.2010 15:25, Premi, Sanjeev wrote:
  -Original Message-
  From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de
  [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
  Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:38 PM
  To: Wolfgang Denk
  Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
  Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
 
  [snip]...[snip]
 
 
I am process of downloading the 2009q3 version from
  codesourcery
Albert mentioned he is using it. Are you on the same
  version as
well?
 
  No, I'm using ELDk 4.2
 
  [sp] Okay, so I downloaded both 2009-q3 and 2010.09-50 
 versions of the
Codesourcery Lite edition.
 
There is no difference in the observations between
  2009q3 and 2010q1.
 
  [sp] I have been able to narrow down the problem to one 
 variable defined
in board/ti/evm.c - omap3_evm_version - declared as:
 static u8 omap3_evm_version;
 
Any attempt to assign value this variable in 
 omap3_evm_get_revision()
leads to the linker error I noted with Codesourcery 
 2010q1-202.
 
With 2009q1-203, definition of variable itself is 
 sufficient to cause
the linker error.
 
 Maybe CCing Codesourcery's mailing list
 
 http://www.codesourcery.com/archives/arm-gnu-discuss/maillist.html
 
 could help, too? At least it's worth a try?

I was thinking of same - only after we understand if there isn't
something we are, possibly, missing in changes to linker scripts.

 
 Dirk
 
I have pasted a patch below that constructs the 
 testcase I have created
to explain these observations:
1) When macros both _EXCLUDE_ME_1 and _EXCLUDE_ME_2 
 are undefined, the
   problem is - as described.
 
2) When only macro _EXCLUDE_ME_1 is defined, the 
 compilation succeeds
   with Codesourcery 2010q1-202; but fails with 2009q1-203.
 
3) When both macros _EXCLUDE_ME_1 and _EXCLUDE_ME_2 
 are defined, the
   compilation succeeds with both codesourcery versions.
 
OMAP3EVM is obviously not the only file using 
 statics. I see their usage
in many files including OMAP3Beagle as well - one 
 reason I did not even
suspect this to be problem.
 
I haven't yet been able to conclude the cause of 
 failure - but appears
to be related to handling of static variables across 
 compiler versions.
Still need to investigate further on this...
 
Board revision needs to be detected early during 
 initialization. How is
this handled for other boards? (I am currently trying 
 to browse non-omap
boards for pointers). Any quick suggestions would be helpful.
 
  [patch]
  diff --git a/board/ti/evm/evm.c b/board/ti/evm/evm.c
  index 09d14f7..e766355 100644
  --- a/board/ti/evm/evm.c
  +++ b/board/ti/evm/evm.c
  @@ -37,15 +37,30 @@
#includeasm/mach-types.h
#include evm.h
 
  +/* #define _EXCLUDE_ME_1 *//* Uncomment - works 
 with 2010q1 only */
  +/* #define _EXCLUDE_ME_2 *//* Uncomment - works 
 with 2009q3 as well */
  +
  +#if !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_2)
static u8 omap3_evm_version;
  +#endif
 
u8 get_omap3_evm_rev(void)
{
  +#ifdef _EXCLUDE_ME_2
  +   return OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_1; /* Debugging: Don't use 
 the variable */
  +#else
  return omap3_evm_version;
  +#endif
  +
}
 
static void omap3_evm_get_revision(void)
{
  +#ifdef _EXCLUDE_ME_COMPLETELY_
  +   /*
  +* Original code in the function is being removed 
 completely to reduce
  +* scope of the debug exercise.
  +*/
#if defined(CONFIG_CMD_NET)
  /*
   * Board revision can be ascertained only by identifying
  @@ -80,6 +95,20 @@ static void omap3_evm_get_revision(void)
  omap3_evm_version = OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_2;
#endif
#endif/* CONFIG_CMD_NET */
  +
  +#else
  +   /*
  +* Dummy implementation of function just for testing
  +*/
  +
  +#if !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_1)  !defined(_EXCLUDE_ME_2)
  +   /*
  +* Dummy assignment just for testing
  +*/
  +   omap3_evm_version = OMAP3EVM_BOARD_GEN_2;
  +#endif
  +
  +#endif /* _EXCLUDE_ME_COMPLETELY_ */
}
 
#ifdef CONFIG_USB_OMAP3
  [/patch]
 
  [snip]
  Removed my observations for Codesourcery 2010.09-50.
  Did not get chance to look at them so far...
  [/snip]
 
  Best regards,
  Sanjeev
  ___
  U-Boot mailing list
  U-Boot@lists.denx.de
  http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
 
 
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de 
 [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
 Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 8:57 PM
 To: Albert ARIBAUD
 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr] 
  Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 8:54 PM
  To: Premi, Sanjeev
  Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
  Subject: Re: Build failures with older toolchain
  
  Le 22/11/2010 16:02, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
   -Original Message-
   From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr]
   Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 8:02 PM
   To: Premi, Sanjeev
   Cc: Wolfgang Denk; u-boot@lists.denx.de
   Subject: Re: Build failures with older toolchain
  
   Le 22/11/2010 14:50, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
   Tried the same stuff for overo and no issues!
  
   Since there linker scripts are same between omap3_evm, 
  omap3_beagle
   and omap3_overo, only difference could have been board
   specific code.
  
   I was hoping to find some code that might be offending 
 the linker;
   unable to find by inspection, I reduced the default 
 configuration
   for the evm to as low as I could - still see:
  
   arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [800fe358 -
   800fee1b] overlaps section .rel.dyn [800fe358 -   8010076f]
   arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma
   0x800fe358 overlaps previous sections
  
   I am still not sure why the start of .bss and .rel.dyn for
   omap3_evm start at same address
  
   That is because they are voluntarily overlapped. This 
  looks like the
   patch I recently did, which in essence does overlap BSS 
  (which is not
   used before relocation) and relocation tables (which are not
   used after
   relocation) so that the FLASH and RAM footprint remain minimal.
  
   [sp] Are you referring to this patch?
 
  http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=aaeb0a890a050b
  58be87fa2b165eec5fa947dc86
  
 I see the change for arm926ejs/u-boot.lds and 
 armv7/u-boot.lds
 to be similar.
  
 Your commit mentions about the new ld vs. old; I 
 had seen this
 earlier as well. It was the reason for me to try 
 CodeSourcery
 Lite 2010-q1 but there I get a different error - 
  mentioned in my
 first post.
  
 Which toolchain version are you using?
  
  I usually try the 2009q3 Code Sourcery and the ELDK 4.2 toolchains.
  
  Can you compare the ld invocation command lines for a failure 
  case and a 
  success case? The difference could be in the linker options.
 
 [sp] Identical :(
  Would you want me to share the build logs or the last step?
  The generated u-boot.lds is also same. It was my first step.
 
  Then I started looking if there is any forced addition on
  specific section that may not be going well with linker/
  relocation changes - reason for trying a minimal config.
 

Albert,

I saw some more - what I believe related changes - since last week;
but the linker error still persists.

with 2009-q1 toolchain:
---
busb_phy.o drivers/video/libvideo.o drivers/watchdog/libwatchdog.o 
common/libcommon.o lib/libfdt/libfdt.o api/libapi.o post/libpost.o 
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/libomap-common.o board/ti/evm/libevm.o 
--end-group /db/psp_git/users/a0756819/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o -L 
/opt/codesourcery/2009q1-203/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.3.3 -lgcc 
-Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [8003f5c0 - 8007e31f] overlaps section 
.rel.dyn [8003f5c0 - 80044e4f]
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .dynsym [80044e50 - 80044eef] overlaps 
section .bss [8003f5c0 - 8007e31f]
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 0x8003f5c0 overlaps 
previous sections
make: *** [u-boot] Error 1

with 2010-q1 toolchain:
---
mmon/libomap-common.o board/ti/evm/libevm.o --end-group 
/db/psp_git/users/a0756819/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o -L 
/opt/codesourcery/2010q1-202/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.4.1/armv4t 
-lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 0x8003e8e0 overlaps 
previous sections
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy -O srec u-boot u-boot.srec
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy --gap-fill=0xff -O binary u-boot u-boot.bin

Best regards,
Sanjeev

 ~sanjeev
 
  
  Amicalement,
  -- 
  Albert.
  
 ___
 U-Boot mailing list
 U-Boot@lists.denx.de
 http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Albert ARIBAUD 
Le 29/11/2010 10:47, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :

 Albert,

 I saw some more - what I believe related changes - since last week;
 but the linker error still persists.

 with 2009-q1 toolchain:
 ---
 busb_phy.o drivers/video/libvideo.o drivers/watchdog/libwatchdog.o 
 common/libcommon.o lib/libfdt/libfdt.o api/libapi.o post/libpost.o 
 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/libomap-common.o board/ti/evm/libevm.o 
 --end-group /db/psp_git/users/a0756819/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o -L 
 /opt/codesourcery/2009q1-203/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.3.3 
 -lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [8003f5c0 -  8007e31f] overlaps 
 section .rel.dyn [8003f5c0 -  80044e4f]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .dynsym [80044e50 -  80044eef] overlaps 
 section .bss [8003f5c0 -  8007e31f]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 0x8003f5c0 overlaps 
 previous sections
 make: *** [u-boot] Error 1

 with 2010-q1 toolchain:
 ---
 mmon/libomap-common.o board/ti/evm/libevm.o --end-group 
 /db/psp_git/users/a0756819/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o -L 
 /opt/codesourcery/2010q1-202/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.4.1/armv4t
  -lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 0x8003e8e0 overlaps 
 previous sections
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy -O srec u-boot u-boot.srec
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy --gap-fill=0xff -O binary u-boot u-boot.bin

Weird... I've compiled v2010.12-rc2, for boards omap3_evm, omap3_overo 
and omap3_beagle, with 2010q1, and here is what I get, which is quite 
different from what you get:

alb...@lilith:~/src/u-boot$ ./MAKEALL omap3_evm omap3_overo omap3_beagle
Configuring for omap3_evm board...
start.S: Assembler messages:
start.S:144: Error: constant expression expected -- `ldr 
sp,=((0x4020FFFC-CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE))'
make[1]: *** [start.o] Erreur 1
make: *** [arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.o] Erreur 2
make: *** Attente des tâches non terminées
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-size: './u-boot': No such file
Configuring for omap3_overo board...
text   data bss dec hex filename
  212965  10840  210624  434429   6a0fd ./u-boot
Configuring for omap3_beagle board...
text   data bss dec hex filename
  243182  11300  203648  458130   6fd92 ./u-boot

- SUMMARY 
Boards compiled: 3
Boards with warnings or errors: 1 ( omap3_evm )
--
alb...@lilith:~/src/u-boot$

 Best regards,
 Sanjeev

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Wolfgang Denk 
Dear Premi, Sanjeev,

can you please quote onlye _relevant_ parts of previous messages?
Thanks.

In message b85a65d85d7eb246be421b3fb0fbb5930247a0a...@dbde02.ent.ti.com you 
wrote:

 with 2009-q1 toolchain:
 ---
 busb_phy.o drivers/video/libvideo.o drivers/watchdog/libwatchdog.o 
 common/libcommon.o lib/libfdt/libfdt.o api/libapi.o post/libpost.o 
 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/libomap-common.o board/ti/evm/libevm.o 
 --end-group /db/psp_git/users/a0756819/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o -L 
 /opt/codesourcery/2009q1-203/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.3.3 
 -lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [8003f5c0 - 8007e31f] overlaps 
 section .rel.dyn [8003f5c0 - 80044e4f]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .dynsym [80044e50 - 80044eef] overlaps 
 section .bss [8003f5c0 - 8007e31f]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 0x8003f5c0 overlaps 
 previous sections
 make: *** [u-boot] Error 1
 
 with 2010-q1 toolchain:
 ---
 mmon/libomap-common.o board/ti/evm/libevm.o --end-group 
 /db/psp_git/users/a0756819/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o -L 
 /opt/codesourcery/2010q1-202/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnueabi/4.4.1/armv4t
  -lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 0x8003e8e0 overlaps 
 previous sections
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy -O srec u-boot u-boot.srec
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy --gap-fill=0xff -O binary u-boot u-boot.bin

Are you sure these are the only errors you see?

Because for me, building for omap3_evm fails like this:

start.S: Assembler messages:
start.S:144: Error: constant expression expected -- `ldr 
sp,=((0x4020FFFC-CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE))'
make[1]: *** [/work/wd/tmp-arm/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.o] Error 1
make: *** [/work/wd/tmp-arm/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.o] Error 2
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
make: *** wait: No child processes.  Stop.

And this is a clear indication that the board support code has not
been adapted yet (CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE has been replaced by
GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE some time ago).


Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
You said you  didn't  want  to  use  CGI.pm,  but  methinks  you  are
needlessly reinventing the wheel, one spoke at a time. Either you are
masochistic,  or  you  just haven't seen enough of what CGI.pm can do
for you. -- Randal L. Schwartz in 8cyb81rg81@gadget.cscaper.com
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr] 
 Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:03 PM
 To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Cc: Premi, Sanjeev
 Subject: Re: Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Le 29/11/2010 10:47, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
 
  Albert,
 
  I saw some more - what I believe related changes - since last week;
  but the linker error still persists.
 
  with 2009-q1 toolchain:
  ---
  busb_phy.o drivers/video/libvideo.o 
 drivers/watchdog/libwatchdog.o common/libcommon.o 
 lib/libfdt/libfdt.o api/libapi.o post/libpost.o 
 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/libomap-common.o 
 board/ti/evm/libevm.o --end-group 
 /db/psp_git/users/a0756819/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o 
 -L 
 /opt/codesourcery/2009q1-203/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnu
 eabi/4.3.3 -lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [8003f5c0 -  
 8007e31f] overlaps section .rel.dyn [8003f5c0 -  80044e4f]
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .dynsym [80044e50 -  
 80044eef] overlaps section .bss [8003f5c0 -  8007e31f]
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 
 0x8003f5c0 overlaps previous sections
  make: *** [u-boot] Error 1
 
  with 2010-q1 toolchain:
  ---
  mmon/libomap-common.o board/ti/evm/libevm.o --end-group 
 /db/psp_git/users/a0756819/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o 
 -L 
 /opt/codesourcery/2010q1-202/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnu
 eabi/4.4.1/armv4t -lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 
 0x8003e8e0 overlaps previous sections
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy -O srec u-boot u-boot.srec
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy --gap-fill=0xff -O binary 
 u-boot u-boot.bin
 
 Weird... I've compiled v2010.12-rc2, for boards omap3_evm, 
 omap3_overo 
 and omap3_beagle, with 2010q1, and here is what I get, which is quite 
 different from what you get:
 
 alb...@lilith:~/src/u-boot$ ./MAKEALL omap3_evm omap3_overo 
 omap3_beagle
 Configuring for omap3_evm board...
 start.S: Assembler messages:
 start.S:144: Error: constant expression expected -- `ldr 
 sp,=((0x4020FFFC-CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE))'
 make[1]: *** [start.o] Erreur 1
 make: *** [arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.o] Erreur 2
 make: *** Attente des tâches non terminées
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-size: './u-boot': No such file
 Configuring for omap3_overo board...
 text data bss dec hex filename
   21296510840  210624  434429   6a0fd ./u-boot
 Configuring for omap3_beagle board...
 text data bss dec hex filename
   24318211300  203648  458130   6fd92 ./u-boot
 
 - SUMMARY 
 Boards compiled: 3
 Boards with warnings or errors: 1 ( omap3_evm )
 --
 alb...@lilith:~/src/u-boot$

[sp] Did you apply the patch I sent to off-the-list?
 (pasted below)

 I had been holding this patch until until the problem is
 really solved - just in case there was a relation.

[patch]
diff --git a/include/configs/omap3_evm.h b/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
index aeb45c6..c93f689 100644
--- a/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
+++ b/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
@@ -348,7 +348,9 @@ extern unsigned int boot_flash_type;
  * Support for relocation
  */
 #define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE  PHYS_SDRAM_1
-#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR(LOW_LEVEL_SRAM_STACK - 
CONFIG_SYS_GBL_D
+#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR(LOW_LEVEL_SRAM_STACK \
+   - GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE)
+

 /*
  * Define the board revision statically
[/patch]

 
  Best regards,
  Sanjeev
 
 Amicalement,
 -- 
 Albert.
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 

 -Original Message-
 From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:w...@denx.de] 
 Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:05 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: Albert ARIBAUD; u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Dear Premi, Sanjeev,
 
 can you please quote onlye _relevant_ parts of previous messages?
 Thanks.

[sp] I do try to snip the messages. I didn't do so this time
 to maintain context - but, may be, I erred on wrong side.

 
 In message 
 b85a65d85d7eb246be421b3fb0fbb5930247a0a...@dbde02.ent.ti.com
  you wrote:
 

[snip]

 
 Are you sure these are the only errors you see?
 
 Because for me, building for omap3_evm fails like this:
 
 start.S: Assembler messages:
 start.S:144: Error: constant expression expected -- `ldr 
 sp,=((0x4020FFFC-CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE))'
 make[1]: *** [/work/wd/tmp-arm/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.o] Error 1
 make: *** [/work/wd/tmp-arm/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/start.o] Error 2
 make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
 make: *** wait: No child processes.  Stop.
 
 And this is a clear indication that the board support code has not
 been adapted yet (CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE has been replaced by
 GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE some time ago).

[sp] I just responded to Albert' message on same issue.

 I stumbled on the current problem while trying to fix just the
 problem you notice here.

 Assuming relation, I had not submitted the patch - so far. But
 it looks to be causing more confusion - so patch follows in next
 few mins.

~sanjeev

 
 
 Best regards,
 
 Wolfgang Denk
 
 -- 
 DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
 HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
 Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
 You said you  didn't  want  to  use  CGI.pm,  but  methinks  you  are
 needlessly reinventing the wheel, one spoke at a time. Either you are
 masochistic,  or  you  just haven't seen enough of what CGI.pm can do
 for you. -- Randal L. Schwartz in 8cyb81rg81@gadget.cscaper.com
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Wolfgang Denk 
Dear Premi, Sanjeev,

can you *please* quote only _relevant_ parts of previous messages?
Thanks.

In message b85a65d85d7eb246be421b3fb0fbb5930247a0a...@dbde02.ent.ti.com you 
wrote:

  I had been holding this patch until until the problem is
  really solved - just in case there was a relation.

You mean you are complaining about problems with code you have
modified locally, and then expect us to diagnose your problems without
even telling us 1) that you changed the code and 2) what exactly you
changed?

This not exactly a useful approach.

 [patch]
 diff --git a/include/configs/omap3_evm.h b/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
 index aeb45c6..c93f689 100644
 --- a/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
 +++ b/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
 @@ -348,7 +348,9 @@ extern unsigned int boot_flash_type;
   * Support for relocation
   */
  #define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE  PHYS_SDRAM_1
 -#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR(LOW_LEVEL_SRAM_STACK - 
 CONFIG_SYS_GBL_D
 +#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR(LOW_LEVEL_SRAM_STACK \
 +   - GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE)
 +

This patch is corrupted.and does not apply.  Please see
http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches


I have no idea if it results in a running system (as I have no
hardware to test it), but I can confirm that a patch like this:

diff --git a/include/configs/omap3_evm.h b/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
index 84b2986..f3df8de 100644
--- a/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
+++ b/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
@@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ extern unsigned int boot_flash_type;
  * Support for relocation
  */
 #define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASE  PHYS_SDRAM_1
-#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR(LOW_LEVEL_SRAM_STACK - 
CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE)
+#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR(LOW_LEVEL_SRAM_STACK - 
GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE)
 
 /*
  * Define the board revision statically

will result in a clean build:

$ ./MAKEALL omap3_evm
Configuring for omap3_evm board...
   textdata bss dec hex filename
 247396   10384  257384  515164   7dc5c /work/wd/tmp-arm/u-boot

- SUMMARY 
Boards compiled: 1
--




Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
Brain fried - Core dumped
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:w...@denx.de] 
 Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 5:00 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: Albert ARIBAUD; u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

[snip]

   I had been holding this patch until until the problem is
   really solved - just in case there was a relation.
 
 You mean you are complaining about problems with code you have
 modified locally, and then expect us to diagnose your problems without
 even telling us 1) that you changed the code and 2) what exactly you
 changed?

[sp] In my original message I did mention about local change. At least,
 then, I believed them to be unrelated... and mentioned so.

 
 This patch is corrupted.and does not apply.  Please see
 http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches
 

[sp] I shared the patch with Albert off-the-list as he had planned
 to work on it... It was to indicate the change that I was doing.

 BTW, I now notice that few chars on the pasted diff seem to have
 been trimed (not sure why) therefore patch didn't apply. Should
 have been more careful...

 I have posted an updated patch refreshed against the latest
 master few mins back.

 
 I have no idea if it results in a running system (as I have no
 hardware to test it), but I can confirm that a patch like this:
 
 diff --git a/include/configs/omap3_evm.h b/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
 index 84b2986..f3df8de 100644
 --- a/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
 +++ b/include/configs/omap3_evm.h
 @@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ extern unsigned int boot_flash_type;
   * Support for relocation
   */
  #define CONFIG_SYS_SDRAM_BASEPHYS_SDRAM_1
 -#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR  
 (LOW_LEVEL_SRAM_STACK - CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE)
 +#define CONFIG_SYS_INIT_SP_ADDR  
 (LOW_LEVEL_SRAM_STACK - GENERATED_GBL_DATA_SIZE)

[sp] Although, you the patch I send earlier didn't apply cleanly,
 I was making the same change... and noticing the failures.

 As mentioned earlier, I did not expect to see any errors after
 making this change.

 I am process of downloading the 2009q3 version from codesourcery
 Albert mentioned he is using it. Are you on the same version as
 well?

~sanjeev

[snip]

___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Wolfgang Denk 
Dear Premi, Sanjeev,

In message b85a65d85d7eb246be421b3fb0fbb5930247a0a...@dbde02.ent.ti.com you 
wrote:

  I am process of downloading the 2009q3 version from codesourcery
  Albert mentioned he is using it. Are you on the same version as
  well?

No, I'm using ELDk 4.2

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
Vulcans do not approve of violence.
-- Spock, Journey to Babel, stardate 3842.4
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:w...@denx.de] 
 Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 5:35 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: Albert ARIBAUD; u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Dear Premi, Sanjeev,
 
 In message 
 b85a65d85d7eb246be421b3fb0fbb5930247a0a...@dbde02.ent.ti.com
  you wrote:
 
   I am process of downloading the 2009q3 version from 
 codesourcery
   Albert mentioned he is using it. Are you on the same version as
   well?
 
 No, I'm using ELDk 4.2

[sp] Okay, so I downloaded both 2009-q3 and 2010.09-50 versions of the
 Codesourcery Lite edition.
 
 There is no difference in the observations between 2009q3 and 2010q1.

 However, the 2010.09-50 returns with screen pages full of the undefined
 reference errors and assertion failures in linker - probably due to
 undefined symbols.

 I tried to revert sort shared by Wolfgang; even that didn't help.

 I will start working backwards from the errors I notice with 2010.09-50.
 Should I post the errors?

~sanjeev

 
 Best regards,
 
 Wolfgang Denk
 
 -- 
 DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
 HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
 Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
 Vulcans do not approve of violence.
   -- Spock, Journey to Babel, stardate 3842.4
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Albert ARIBAUD 
Le 29/11/2010 16:08, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :

   I will start working backwards from the errors I notice with 2010.09-50.
   Should I post the errors?

You should post patches against the master branch for others to be able 
to build the same code as you build. Do not post the compile errors, 
though: rather, try and find why they occur and post your conclusions.

 ~sanjeev

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-29 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr] 
 Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 9:04 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: Wolfgang Denk; u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Le 29/11/2010 16:08, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
 
I will start working backwards from the errors I 
 notice with 2010.09-50.
Should I post the errors?
 
 You should post patches against the master branch for others 
 to be able 
 to build the same code as you build. Do not post the compile errors, 
 though: rather, try and find why they occur and post your conclusions.

[sp] I am working on analysis.

 
  ~sanjeev
 
 Amicalement,
 -- 
 Albert.
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-22 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:w...@denx.de] 
 Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 1:44 AM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Dear Premi, Sanjeev,
 
 In message 
 b85a65d85d7eb246be421b3fb0fbb59302477ea...@dbde02.ent.ti.com
  you wrote:
 
  This points leads me to this commit:
   
  commit 6d8962e814c15807dd6ac5757904be2a02d187b8
  Author: Sebastien Carlier sebastien.carl...@gmail.com
  Date:   Fri Nov 5 15:48:07 2010 +0100
  
  Switch from archive libraries to partial linking
  
  Is this related to toolchain version?
  Still doesn't explain why failure occurs for omap3_evm; not 
 omap3_beagle...
 
 This commit may require further changes to board specific 
 linker scripts.

[sp] Both boards share the same 'u-boot.lds' And there is no board
 specific lds. Still trying to figure what could be wrong.

~sanjeev

 
 Best regards,
 
 Wolfgang Denk
 
 -- 
 DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
 HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
 Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
 The use of anthropomorphic terminology when  dealing  with  computing
 systems is a symptom of professional immaturity.   -- Edsger Dijkstra
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-22 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de 
 [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
 Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 2:44 PM
 To: Wolfgang Denk
 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Wolfgang Denk [mailto:w...@denx.de] 
  Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 1:44 AM
  To: Premi, Sanjeev
  Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
  Subject: Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
  
  Dear Premi, Sanjeev,
  
  In message 
  b85a65d85d7eb246be421b3fb0fbb59302477ea...@dbde02.ent.ti.com
   you wrote:
  
   This points leads me to this commit:

   commit 6d8962e814c15807dd6ac5757904be2a02d187b8
   Author: Sebastien Carlier sebastien.carl...@gmail.com
   Date:   Fri Nov 5 15:48:07 2010 +0100
   
   Switch from archive libraries to partial linking
   
   Is this related to toolchain version?
   Still doesn't explain why failure occurs for omap3_evm; not 
  omap3_beagle...
  
  This commit may require further changes to board specific 
  linker scripts.
 
 [sp] Both boards share the same 'u-boot.lds' And there is no board
  specific lds. Still trying to figure what could be wrong.

Tried the same stuff for overo and no issues!

Since there linker scripts are same between omap3_evm, omap3_beagle
and omap3_overo, only difference could have been board specific code.

I was hoping to find some code that might be offending the linker;
unable to find by inspection, I reduced the default configuration
for the evm to as low as I could - still see:

arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [800fe358 - 800fee1b] overlaps section 
.rel.dyn [800fe358 - 8010076f]
arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 0x800fe358 overlaps 
previous sections

I am still not sure why the start of .bss and .rel.dyn for omap3_evm start at 
same address
but 

Looking for more pointers!
Specifically, a big generic change that somehow didn't touch the omap3evm; 
but did touch others.
...will start looking at the git-log immediately after this mail.

~sanjeev

 
 ~sanjeev
 
  
  Best regards,
  
  Wolfgang Denk
  
  -- 
  DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  
 Detlev Zundel
  HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 
 Groebenzell, Germany
  Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: 
 w...@denx.de
  The use of anthropomorphic terminology when  dealing  with  
 computing
  systems is a symptom of professional immaturity.   -- 
 Edsger Dijkstra
  
 ___
 U-Boot mailing list
 U-Boot@lists.denx.de
 http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-22 Thread Albert ARIBAUD 
Le 22/11/2010 14:50, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
 Tried the same stuff for overo and no issues!

 Since there linker scripts are same between omap3_evm, omap3_beagle
 and omap3_overo, only difference could have been board specific code.

 I was hoping to find some code that might be offending the linker;
 unable to find by inspection, I reduced the default configuration
 for the evm to as low as I could - still see:

 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [800fe358 -  800fee1b] overlaps 
 section .rel.dyn [800fe358 -  8010076f]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 0x800fe358 overlaps 
 previous sections

 I am still not sure why the start of .bss and .rel.dyn for omap3_evm start at 
 same address

That is because they are voluntarily overlapped. This looks like the 
patch I recently did, which in essence does overlap BSS (which is not 
used before relocation) and relocation tables (which are not used after 
relocation) so that the FLASH and RAM footprint remain minimal.

This should not result in a linker message unless the .lds does not 
follow the same structure (order and attributes of output sections) as, 
for instance, the arm926ejs u-boot.lds.

 but

 Looking for more pointers!
 Specifically, a big generic change that somehow didn't touch the omap3evm; 
 but did touch others.
 will start looking at the git-log immediately after this mail.

 ~sanjeev

Look up the u-boot.lds files. Are they shared?

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-22 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr] 
 Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 8:02 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: Wolfgang Denk; u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Le 22/11/2010 14:50, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
  Tried the same stuff for overo and no issues!
 
  Since there linker scripts are same between omap3_evm, omap3_beagle
  and omap3_overo, only difference could have been board 
 specific code.
 
  I was hoping to find some code that might be offending the linker;
  unable to find by inspection, I reduced the default configuration
  for the evm to as low as I could - still see:
 
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [800fe358 -  
 800fee1b] overlaps section .rel.dyn [800fe358 -  8010076f]
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 
 0x800fe358 overlaps previous sections
 
  I am still not sure why the start of .bss and .rel.dyn for 
 omap3_evm start at same address
 
 That is because they are voluntarily overlapped. This looks like the 
 patch I recently did, which in essence does overlap BSS (which is not 
 used before relocation) and relocation tables (which are not 
 used after 
 relocation) so that the FLASH and RAM footprint remain minimal.
 
 This should not result in a linker message unless the .lds does not 
 follow the same structure (order and attributes of output 
 sections) as, 
 for instance, the arm926ejs u-boot.lds.

[sp] Thanks for the pointer. I will take a look at it. I am still
 surprised why the problem doesn't show up on beagle and overo
 which share the same lds.

 
  but
 
  Looking for more pointers!
  Specifically, a big generic change that somehow didn't 
 touch the omap3evm; but did touch others.
  will start looking at the git-log immediately after this mail.
 
  ~sanjeev
 
 Look up the u-boot.lds files. Are they shared?

[sp] Before sending the previous mail. I compared the u-boot.lds
 generated for omap3_evm and omap3_beagle and they are identical!

 
 Amicalement,
 -- 
 Albert.
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-22 Thread Albert ARIBAUD 
Le 22/11/2010 16:02, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
 -Original Message-
 From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr]
 Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 8:02 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: Wolfgang Denk; u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: Build failures with older toolchain

 Le 22/11/2010 14:50, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
 Tried the same stuff for overo and no issues!

 Since there linker scripts are same between omap3_evm, omap3_beagle
 and omap3_overo, only difference could have been board
 specific code.

 I was hoping to find some code that might be offending the linker;
 unable to find by inspection, I reduced the default configuration
 for the evm to as low as I could - still see:

 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [800fe358 -
 800fee1b] overlaps section .rel.dyn [800fe358 -   8010076f]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma
 0x800fe358 overlaps previous sections

 I am still not sure why the start of .bss and .rel.dyn for
 omap3_evm start at same address

 That is because they are voluntarily overlapped. This looks like the
 patch I recently did, which in essence does overlap BSS (which is not
 used before relocation) and relocation tables (which are not
 used after
 relocation) so that the FLASH and RAM footprint remain minimal.

 [sp] Are you referring to this patch?
   
 http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=aaeb0a890a050b58be87fa2b165eec5fa947dc86

   I see the change for arm926ejs/u-boot.lds and armv7/u-boot.lds
   to be similar.

   Your commit mentions about the new ld vs. old; I had seen this
   earlier as well. It was the reason for me to try CodeSourcery
   Lite 2010-q1 but there I get a different error - mentioned in my
   first post.

   Which toolchain version are you using?

I usually try the 2009q3 Code Sourcery and the ELDK 4.2 toolchains.

Can you compare the ld invocation command lines for a failure case and a 
success case? The difference could be in the linker options.

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-22 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr] 
 Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 8:54 PM
 To: Premi, Sanjeev
 Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: Re: Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Le 22/11/2010 16:02, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
  -Original Message-
  From: Albert ARIBAUD [mailto:albert.arib...@free.fr]
  Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 8:02 PM
  To: Premi, Sanjeev
  Cc: Wolfgang Denk; u-boot@lists.denx.de
  Subject: Re: Build failures with older toolchain
 
  Le 22/11/2010 14:50, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :
  Tried the same stuff for overo and no issues!
 
  Since there linker scripts are same between omap3_evm, 
 omap3_beagle
  and omap3_overo, only difference could have been board
  specific code.
 
  I was hoping to find some code that might be offending the linker;
  unable to find by inspection, I reduced the default configuration
  for the evm to as low as I could - still see:
 
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [800fe358 -
  800fee1b] overlaps section .rel.dyn [800fe358 -   8010076f]
  arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma
  0x800fe358 overlaps previous sections
 
  I am still not sure why the start of .bss and .rel.dyn for
  omap3_evm start at same address
 
  That is because they are voluntarily overlapped. This 
 looks like the
  patch I recently did, which in essence does overlap BSS 
 (which is not
  used before relocation) and relocation tables (which are not
  used after
  relocation) so that the FLASH and RAM footprint remain minimal.
 
  [sp] Are you referring to this patch?

 http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=aaeb0a890a050b
 58be87fa2b165eec5fa947dc86
 
I see the change for arm926ejs/u-boot.lds and armv7/u-boot.lds
to be similar.
 
Your commit mentions about the new ld vs. old; I had seen this
earlier as well. It was the reason for me to try CodeSourcery
Lite 2010-q1 but there I get a different error - 
 mentioned in my
first post.
 
Which toolchain version are you using?
 
 I usually try the 2009q3 Code Sourcery and the ELDK 4.2 toolchains.
 
 Can you compare the ld invocation command lines for a failure 
 case and a 
 success case? The difference could be in the linker options.

[sp] Identical :(
 Would you want me to share the build logs or the last step?
 The generated u-boot.lds is also same. It was my first step.

 Then I started looking if there is any forced addition on
 specific section that may not be going well with linker/
 relocation changes - reason for trying a minimal config.

~sanjeev

 
 Amicalement,
 -- 
 Albert.
 
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-22 Thread Albert ARIBAUD 
Le 22/11/2010 16:27, Premi, Sanjeev a écrit :

   Would you want me to share the build logs or the last step?
   The generated u-boot.lds is also same. It was my first step.

Obviously you don't have the ELF binary for the failure case, but maybe 
you have the map file for it? Then can you make the map files available 
to me outside of the list?

Otherwise, if you are building the current master without patches, I 
should be able to install and use the same toolchain as you and compile 
the same targets, and see the issue on my side -- only this will have to 
wait for a couple of days.

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-19 Thread Premi, Sanjeev 
 -Original Message-
 From: u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de 
 [mailto:u-boot-boun...@lists.denx.de] On Behalf Of Premi, Sanjeev
 Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 12:21 AM
 To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
 Subject: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain
 
 Hi all,
 
 I pulled u-boot about an hour ago and master is at this commit:
 
 Author: Matthias Weisser weiss...@arcor.de
 Date:   Thu Nov 18 09:35:09 2010 +0100
 
 Makefile: Fix build with USE_PRIVATE_LIBGCC
 
 (plus a small change in omap3_config.h - unrelated) 
 
 When trying to build u-boot I was constantly, getting these errors:
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [8003f5c8 - 
 8007e327] overlaps section .rel.dyn [8003f5c8 - 80044e57]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .dynsym [80044e58 - 
 80044ef7] overlaps section .bss [8003f5c8 - 8007e327]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 
 0x8003f5c8 overlaps previous sections
 
 Tried to build omap3_beagle and there were no issues; unable to
 debug for long, I decided to come back on this problem later.
 Opened a new window and started working on my Linux tree.
 
 Returned back to u-boot, and this time build was successful for no
 evident change. Took me some time to realise that the toolchain
 I was using to work on Linux repo was different - I use an env
 script based on activity.
 
 To verify the doubts, I explicitly ran this command with two different
 versions of toolchain in my path and I see different results. Here are
 last few lines of final build step
 
 
 Failure with Codesourcery 2009q1-203:
 
 h/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o -L 
 /opt/codesourcery/2009q1-203/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnu
 eabi/4.3.3 -lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .bss [8003f5c8 - 
 8007e327] overlaps section .rel.dyn [8003f5c8 - 80044e57]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: section .dynsym [80044e58 - 
 80044ef7] overlaps section .bss [8003f5c8 - 8007e327]
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 
 0x8003f5c8 overlaps previous sections
 make: *** [u-boot] Error 1
 premi # pwd
 /home/premi/git/u-boot
 premi #
 
 Success with Codesourcery 2010q1-202:
 
 19/u-boot/arch/arm/lib/eabi_compat.o -L 
 /opt/codesourcery/2010q1-202/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-linux-gnu
 eabi/4.4.1/armv4t -lgcc -Map u-boot.map -o u-boot
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: u-boot: section .bss vma 
 0x8003e8e8 overlaps previous sections
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy -O srec u-boot u-boot.srec
 arm-none-linux-gnueabi-objcopy --gap-fill=0xff -O binary 
 u-boot u-boot.bin
 premi # pwd
 /home/premi/git/u-boot
 premi #
 
 The configuration for beagle still build successfully for 
 both toolchain versions.
 Any clues/ suggestions? Is there a recent change which hasn't 
 yet been adapted or
 ported for omap3evm?

Here is my log of git-bisect:
Was trying to find if any commit made changes that could be specific to 
toolchain version.

Due to state of the omap3evm, 2 changes in configs/omap3_evm.h had to be done 
manually
at some stage - to avoid compile errors due to undefined symbols.

premi # git bisect log
git bisect start
# good: [e0ccbe367ed4465db930a37a850c889827fb076b] Merge branch 'master' of 
http://git.denx.de/u-boot
git bisect good e0ccbe367ed4465db930a37a850c889827fb076b
# bad: [e3dae922877505c89823b17acaefdf83a6d92ce2] work in progress
git bisect bad e3dae922877505c89823b17acaefdf83a6d92ce2
# good: [f2b382ea066d02d5ba44870024cc1295e85782ef] Merge branch 'master' of 
git://git.denx.de/u-boot-mpc85xx
git bisect good f2b382ea066d02d5ba44870024cc1295e85782ef
# good: [d75c2a3d7f34ff1eb9920ad72483cff7cb6d358f] Merge branch 'master' of 
git://git.denx.de/u-boot-imx
git bisect good d75c2a3d7f34ff1eb9920ad72483cff7cb6d358f
# good: [a72dbae2ccd38d2b32f8b814f5a528c88be65bd3] fsl_pci_init: Make 
fsl_pci_init_port() PCI/PCIe aware
git bisect good a72dbae2ccd38d2b32f8b814f5a528c88be65bd3
# good: [a72dbae2ccd38d2b32f8b814f5a528c88be65bd3] fsl_pci_init: Make 
fsl_pci_init_port() PCI/PCIe aware
git bisect good a72dbae2ccd38d2b32f8b814f5a528c88be65bd3
# good: [a72dbae2ccd38d2b32f8b814f5a528c88be65bd3] fsl_pci_init: Make 
fsl_pci_init_port() PCI/PCIe aware
git bisect good a72dbae2ccd38d2b32f8b814f5a528c88be65bd3
# good: [227b72515546fca535dbd3274f6d875d97f494fe] Merge branch 'master' of 
git://git.denx.de/u-boot-ti
git bisect good 227b72515546fca535dbd3274f6d875d97f494fe
# good: [8ad25bf8d9233eb7d0b614612108622a59069354] Net: clarify 
board/cpu_eth_init calls
git bisect good 8ad25bf8d9233eb7d0b614612108622a59069354
# bad: [f7ac99fdd9eaf64df9731c2e8fdf97e9d3e2c82a] net: e1000: typo using wrong 
argument to sizeof
git bisect bad f7ac99fdd9eaf64df9731c2e8fdf97e9d3e2c82a
# good: [858ecd9ac3434e011e84d5fd9013bd1ee199dbdc] tx25: fix linker file for 
newer ld support
git bisect good 858ecd9ac3434e011e84d5fd9013bd1ee199dbdc
# bad: [6d8962e814c15807dd6ac5757904be2a02d187b8] Switch from archive libraries 
to partial linking
git bisect bad 6d8962e814c15807dd6ac5757904be2a02d187b8
premi #

This points leads me to

Re: [U-Boot] Build failures with older toolchain

2010-11-19 Thread Wolfgang Denk 
Dear Premi, Sanjeev,

In message b85a65d85d7eb246be421b3fb0fbb59302477ea...@dbde02.ent.ti.com you 
wrote:

 This points leads me to this commit:
  
 commit 6d8962e814c15807dd6ac5757904be2a02d187b8
 Author: Sebastien Carlier sebastien.carl...@gmail.com
 Date:   Fri Nov 5 15:48:07 2010 +0100
 
 Switch from archive libraries to partial linking
 
 Is this related to toolchain version?
 Still doesn't explain why failure occurs for omap3_evm; not omap3_beagle...

This commit may require further changes to board specific linker scripts.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk  Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de
The use of anthropomorphic terminology when  dealing  with  computing
systems is a symptom of professional immaturity.   -- Edsger Dijkstra
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot