Re: missing gold --be8 support

On 24 May 2016 at 18:13, Peter Smith wrote: > I think that the bit missing from Gold is the endian reversal code for > instructions, in ARMv7 BE8. If that is implemented then no additional > support is needed for LTO. I would suspect that it would be much > quicker to

Re: missing gold --be8 support

Hello, BE8 support in ARMv7 is independent of LTO. In essence the bit-code file will be code-generated into a big-endian object file. To a linker this is no different to an big-endian ELF object file from the command line or a static library. I think that the bit missing from Gold is the endian

Re: missing gold --be8 support

On 24 May 2016 at 17:05, Jim Wilson wrote: > Cisco is trying to use clang/lto on big-endian arm, which apparently > requires gold, and gold does not support the --be8 option which is > required for ARMv7 big-endian support. Does anyone here care about > this? Hi Jim,

missing gold --be8 support

Cisco is trying to use clang/lto on big-endian arm, which apparently requires gold, and gold does not support the --be8 option which is required for ARMv7 big-endian support. Does anyone here care about this? Umesh Kalappa asked about this on the binutils mailing list

[ACTIVITY] Week 20

== Progress == o Extended validation (7/10) * Investigate GDB instabilities: - branch tracing issue are due to builder feature support - Our 2 old builders, which don't support it, removed from x86 validation pool * Benchmarking: - Looked at Lava instance API and lava-tool