linaro-toolchain June 2013

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

20 participants
54 discussions

[ACTIVITY] 17-21 June 2013

by Kugan

== Progress == * Generate single call to divmod - Addressed review comments - Proposed a new patch for discussion * spec2k comparison between ARM and x86 - Obtained Profile results for both architectures - Analysing gzip and found some register allocation issues. * VRP based zero/sign extension - Still no review for rtl changes - Pinged again == Plan == * Continue with spec2k comparison between ARM and x86

10 years, 10 months

[ACTIVITY] June 17-21

by Rob Savoye

== Progress == * Added support to cbuildv2 to handle merges from GCC trunk. * Merged backports of 199694 199705 199733 199734 199739 199810 199814 199533 200019 200020 200061 200062 200096 200148 200152. * Managed to survive making complex travel plans for the next few weeks. * Fixed eembc and denbench benchmarks so they work again. == Plan == * Work on benchmarking & testing database, more graphs, write up presentation. * Fix running spec2000 benchmark, produce some results. * Commit backports to svn as merges approved. * Off on leave Wed till Connect. Will be 100% offline. == Issues == * Backports of 199792, 199959 have major conflicts. Required patches for these to be merged not in backports list. * Turns out benchmarks have not worked for several months, particularly spec2000 still doesn't want to run.

10 years, 10 months

2013.06 issues with semi-hosting on Foundation Model w/ gcc

by rorycollins＠hushmail.com

Still having the issue of FM/semi-hosting not catching seg-faults using 2013.06. With "aem-ve.specs", a fault seems to call main() repeatedly. With "dimon.specs", FM hangs. Any ideas how to properly compile/deal with faults in semi-hosting mode? thanks, Rory === hello.c === #include <stdio.h> int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { printf("hello.\n"); * ((unsigned int *) 0) = 0; // cause seg-fault return 0; } === compile/run === .../gcc-linaro-aarch64-none-elf-4.8-2013.06_linux/bin/aarch64-none-elf-gcc -specs=aem-ve.specs -march=armv8-a -c hello.c .../gcc-linaro-aarch64-none-elf-4.8-2013.06_linux/bin/aarch64-none-elf-gcc -o hello -specs=aem-ve.specs -march=armv8-a hello.o .../Foundation_v8 --image hello --quiet --semihost-cmd=hello hello. hello. hello. hello. hello. ...

10 years, 10 months

[ACTIVITY] 17-21 June 2013

by Christophe Lyon

== Progress == * Completed list of backports from trunk to linaro-4.8 for 2013.07 release and sent it to Rob. * Merged backport of address sanitizer in linaro-4.8 branch * Aarch64 frame growing downward: checking what really needs to be changed in GCC. Documentation not very verbose :-) * Various attemps to resurrect my old testsuite patch to be stricter at excluding some unsupported configurations. * Internal support == Next == * Aarch64 frame growing downard. * Disable peeling: make the vectorizer less aggressive * Neon intrinsics/vuzip/veor: resume work * Book hotel/flight for Connect.

10 years, 10 months

[ACTIVITY] Week 24

by Renato Golin

== Progress == * Release 3.3 - Finally public http://llvm.org/releases/download.html#3.3 http://llvm.org/releases/3.3/docs/ReleaseNotes.html * Pandaboard - We lost two bots this week: - linaro-panda-01: buildslave binary segfaults, needs fresh re-install? - linaro-panda-02: GCC installation is broken, needs fresh install!! - This means we need: - At least two boards for each bot - At least one extra board of each type, off-line to save power/space - A standard Image on a gz file to flash & boot quickly, for each type * Chromebook LNT - Binary search on patch that broke the buildbot, found the culprit - Reduced the problem, bug posted, discussing http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16393 * CBuild - Built Clang+LLVM in CBuild, need benchmarks, sent a patch, waiting for merge * Phoronix results - Adding them to internal (pw protected) website to avoid public confusion - The numbers are meaningless for now and we don't want panic within the general public: http://people.linaro.org/toolchain-benchmarks/llvm/ - Visualization still broken. Works well only locally on Firefox. Why not HTML? Why not PNG? Sigh... * Administrativia / Others - Lots of patches to review - Auto-vectorizer now turned on by default on -O2 and -Os! - Meeting with LLVMLinux folks, good progress, good plans, trying to get more traction in that direction on Connect - Trial of "ARM maintenance" backlog item: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=16387 == Plan == * Fix LNT bug * Implement AEABI divmod/udivmod calls * Try CBuild benchmark again (when patch merged) * Carefully analyse what's the best configuration for the pandas and produce a pre-packed image * NOT put them back before they're stable * But put TWO pandas as self-hosting (and leave Galina's alone) * Check why Phoronix result pages are not working Time allowing... * Have a look at PerfDB * Write a thing or two about the optimization levels in LLVM for the official docs

10 years, 10 months

[ACTIVITY] Week 25

by Will Newton

== Progress == * Reverted AArch64 ifunc change while investiigation continues. * Created TCWG-177 for gdb.thread testsuite failures. * Merged new strlen code into cortex-strings and newlib. * Applied a few more gdb patches upstream. * Fixed a few bugs and added a few features to cortex-strings benchmarks. * gerrit review of memcpy change ongoing. == Issues == * None. == Plan == * Reproduce AArch64 ifunc issue. * Resolve gerrit memcpy review if possible. * Start work on malloc test and benchmark framework. -- Will Newton Toolchain Working Group, Linaro

10 years, 10 months

[ACTIVITY] report week 25

by Peter Maydell

Progress: * virtio: ** have some patches that work (including modifying the device tree to tell the kernel where the virtio transports are) ** more cleanup still required; in particular need to figure out nice way of having the board model tell boot.c where the transports are and what the interrupt routing info should look like ** virtio spec needs clarification about what a virtio-mmio transport with no backend is supposed to look like * misc: ** fixed linux-user utimensat breakage caused by a patch of mine from last week ** helped Grant Likely with debugging problems running UEFI on QEMU (and caught a QEMU bug in the process) ** reviewed another round of LDA/STL patches and a VSEL patch Plans: * continue mach-virt/virtio work -- PMM

10 years, 10 months

[ANNOUNCE] Linaro Toolchain Binaries 2013.06 released

by Bernhard Rosenkränzer

The Linaro Toolchain and Platform Working Groups are pleased to announce the 2013.06 release of the Linaro Toolchain Binaries, a pre-built version of Linaro GCC and Linaro GDB that runs on generic Linux or Windows and targets the glibc Linaro Evaluation Build. Uses include: * Cross compiling ARM applications from your laptop * Remote debugging * Build the Linux kernel for your board What's included: * Linaro GCC 4.8 2013.06 * Linaro Newlib 2.0 2013.06 * Linaro Binutils 2.23 2013.06 * Linaro Eglibc 2.17-2013.06 (Aarch64 only) * Linaro GDB 7.6 2013.05 * A statically linked gdbserver * A system root * Manuals under share/doc/ The system root contains the basic header files and libraries to link your programs against. Interesting changes include: * Linaro versions of Binutils, Newlib and Eglibc are included The Linux version is supported on Ubuntu 10.04.3 and 12.04, Debian 6.0.2, Fedora 16, openSUSE 12.1, Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation 5.7 and later, and should run on any Linux Standard Base 3.0 compatible distribution. Please see the README about running on x86_64 hosts. The Windows version is supported on Windows XP Pro SP3, Windows Vista Business SP2, and Windows 7 Pro SP1. The binaries and build scripts are available from: https://launchpad.net/linaro-toolchain-binaries/trunk/2013.05 Need help? Ask a question on https://ask.linaro.org/ Already on Launchpad? Submit a bug at https://bugs.launchpad.net/linaro-toolchain-binaries On IRC? See us on #linaro on Freenode. Other ways that you can contact us or get involved are listed at https://wiki.linaro.org/GettingInvolved. Note: This will likely be the last release built with support for (e)glibc 2.15 on armv7. With future releases, you will have to either use a newer (e)glibc on the target system, or link statically.

10 years, 10 months

Re: [Buildroot] Bizarre behavior of armeb toolchain

by Will Newton

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni(a)free-electrons.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm facing a bizarre problem with an armeb toolchain built by > Buildroot. I'm also posting this to the crossgcc@ list since there are > some gcc/binutils experts out there. > > First, a little bit of background. ARM Big Endian comes into two > variants: > > * BE32, which was used up to ARMv5, where both the instructions and > the data are Big Endian. > > * BE8, which is used since ARMv6, where the instructions remain > little-endian and only the data are big-endian. > > See > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi0338g/ch06s0… > for some details about this. > > So, I've built an ARMv7 Cortex-A8 toolchain, with the armeb > architecture selected. The CROSS-gcc -v shows that it was configured as > follows: > > --target=armeb-buildroot-linux-uclibcgnueabi > --with-abi=aapcs-linux > --with-arch=armv7-a > --with-tune=cortex-a8 > > Then, I wrote a simple program that contains some data and > instructions, built it under several conditions, and observed with > hexdump whether the data and code was little-endian or big-endian. > > And the results are somewhat surprising: when I explicitly pass > -mbig-endian, I get the proper behavior (BE8 code with code in little > endian and data in big endian), but when I don't pass any flags to the > compiler, I get an incorrect behavior: both the code and data are big > endian, as if the BE8 wasn't used (and readelf confirms that it wasn't > used). See below the detailed results. > > Note that the compiler is supposed to automatically use BE8 on > ARMv6/ARMv7 and BE32 on ARMv5 and earlier cores. > > The data is DEADBEEF, and the instruction is E52DB004. > > Flags used Observed data Observed code Comment > ======================= =============== =============== ========================================= > > -mlittle-endian EFBEADDE 04B02DE5 Code and data in LE -> OK > -mbig-endian DEADBEEF 04B02DE5 Code LE, data BE, binary marked BE8 -> OK > no flags DEADBEEF E52DB004 Data BE (ok!), code BE (*NOT* ok) -> NOK > -march=armv5t -mbig-endian DEADBEEF E52DB004 Code and data in BE, on ARMv5 -> OK > -march=armv5t DEADBEEF E52DB004 Code and data in BE, on ARMv5 -> OK > > As can be seen in this table: > > (*) On ARMv5, regardless of whether -mbig-endian is passed or not, the > code produced is correct (both code and data are big endian, which is > correct for ARMv5 where the big endian mode is BE32) > > (*) On ARMv7 however, the code is different whether -mbig-endian is > passed or not, even though an "armeb-linux" compiler is supposed to > generate big endian code by default. When no flags is passed, both the > data *and* code are big-endian (so it's BE32 like on ARMv5), but > passing -mbig-endian makes the thing behave properly (code is > little-endian, data is big-endian). > > I'm using binutils 2.23.2 and gcc 4.7.3. > > Any ideas? Hi Thomas, I added linaro-toolchain to CC as there may be someone there who knows the answer.

10 years, 10 months

RE: Semi-hosting on v8 Foundation Model using gnu tools

by rorycollins＠hushmail.com

I got an app to compile fine for v8 FM with gcc, but I notice that seg-faults hang the simulator. Using raise() properly exits FM, but I can't seem to trap the seg-fault with signal() or do anything intelligent to know about the seg-fault. Normal execution works well. int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { * (unsigned int *) (0) = 0; // seg-fault hangs FM return(0); } thanks, Rory -----Original Message----- From: linaro-toolchain-boun...(a)lists.linaro.org [mailto:linaro-toolchain-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Gretton-Dann Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 2:47 PM To: Padgett Don-B43265 Cc: linaro-toolchain(a)lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: Semi-hosting on v8 Foundation Model using gnu tools Don, On 17/05/13 20:57, Padgett Don-B43265 wrote: > The v8 Foundation Model User Guide has a bare metal hello world example > that uses semi-hosting. The Makefile uses ARM tools, however. Is there > equivalent support for this example using a bare metal version of the > gnu tools, such as > gcc-linaro-aarch64-none-elf-4.8-2013.04-20130422_linux.tar.xz? I took > a look, but didn't see a way to do this. It is possible but not necessarily easy. Using the binary tools you've downloaded you will want to do something like the following: aarch64-none-elf-gcc -specs=elf-aem-ve.specs ... The -specs option has to be on all your invocations of GCC and G++. You should also invoke the linker through GCC with this option. Then you need to invoke the model, given an image called foo.axf: Foundation_v8 --image foo.axf --semi-host="foo.axf OPT1 OPT2" --quiet Note that the first option to --semi-host is the name of the image again. Thanks, Matt

10 years, 10 months

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain June 2013