linaro-toolchain

linaro-toolchain@lists.linaro.org

7 participants
5663 discussions

[ACTIVITY] 27-31 May 2013

by Kugan

== Progress == * VRP based zero/sign extension - Tested and posted the latest patch * Better end of loop counter optimisation - Tree level optimization are optimized in mainline - Christophe noted a slight change in asm generated from earlier version - tracked down the patch causing this and communicated this. * Generate a single call to divmod - Looked at expand_divmod to understand how __aeabi_idiv and __aeabi_idivmod are generated. == Plan == * Better end of loop counter optimisation - Change the pattern to remove this additional instruction if necessary. * Generate a single call to divmod - Come up with a solution

12 years, 6 months

[ACTIVITY] Week 22

by Zhenqiang Chen

== Issues == * None == Progress == * Shrink wrapping improvement (TCWG-133) - Call copyprop to optimized the parameter register move instructions. - Test is ongoing. * Update aarch64-none-elf toolchain newlib version to 2.0~20130530 (lp:1185711). == Plan == * Collect performance data for TCWG-133. * Continue on conditional compare. Best Regards! -Zhenqiang

12 years, 6 months

[ACTIVITY] for week 22

by Rob Savoye

== Progress == * Monday holiday here too, so went mountain climbing * Finally fixed Lava token for cbuild * Dug into EC2 issues, still confused * Cloned infrastructure files from gcc.gnu.org, which turned out to be out of date, so updated them to the current releases. That then required fixing a few minor configure bugs in libppl. Files in ~/cbuild/var/snapshots/infrastructure. Infrastructure libs are statically linked so they're consistent across platforms. * Worked on cbuildv2, it now downloads a tarball or does a bzr|git|svn checkout, configures, compiles, and installs them in a sysroot as other packages depend on them. Also added a function to download, build, and install all the toolchain infrastructure libraries in a sysroot for binutils & GCC to use at build time https://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/rsavoye/cbuild2;a=summary * Automated import of all historical test results till running. Currently the DB has 137,687,996 test results, 1909 separate test runs of GCC, and covering 544 versions. == Plan == * Add remote SSH support to DejaGnu for remote testing on Chromebook. (carried over from this week) * Figure out the EC2 mess and document it better * Clone gcc_release.sh script but enhance so a similar process can be applied to releasing Eglibc, Newlib, and the Binutils. * Start gearing up for the releases * Finish cross build and testing support in Cbuildv2, which would basically eliminate the need for crosstool-ng.

12 years, 6 months

[ACTIVITY] Week 22

by Will Newton

== Progress == * 4 day week due to bank holiday. * Merged binutils arm ifunc changes onto stable branch. * Worked on getting some git mirrors setup for various toolchain deliverables. * A certain amount of planning and JIRA card work in preparation for the next iteration. * Fixed aarch64_be-* and aarch64-elf testsuite issues with AArch64 ifunc patch. * Investigated glibc malloc and alternatives. == Issues == * None. == Plan == * Submit new AArch64 ifunc patch after testing complete. * Finish getting git mirrors setup. * Look at some gdb testsuite failures. -- Will Newton Toolchain Working Group, Linaro

12 years, 6 months

[ACTIVITY] report week 22

by Peter Maydell

[very short week; two days] Progress: * misc ** handover from John Rigby: got a QEMU+KVM+AArch64 setup running with his work-in-progress patchset ** tracked down weird behaviour when ^C'ing qemu on aarch64 to a bug in glibc's getcontext() implementation (it doesn't clear the PSTATE field and ends up passing a garbage pstate to the rt_sigreturn syscall) Plans: * VIRT-55: talk to Andre about testing; investigate testing migration using LAVA * set up a new qemu-linaro tree/branch as our CI/LAVA input [to keep it separate from our "we release this" tree] * restart work on upstreaming omap3 patches as part of my generic qemu maintenance work (will reduce our maintenance burden in the long term) -- PMM

12 years, 6 months

[ACTIVITY] Week 22

by Renato Golin

== Progress == * 3.3 Release - RC2 is out, we'll have an RC3 (critical bug on X86_64/Darwin) - Adding some docs to the release * Infrastructure - Installing Ubuntu on Chromebook, automating bootstrap+test-suite - Running the test-suite on a BeagleBoard (LLVM 3.2 and 3.3), no regressions - Trying to run an LLVM CBuild job * Buildbots - Chasing GCC internal failure on self-host bot - Chasing more MCJIT failures on all bots == Issues == - Upgrading to 13.04 was a big mistake, had to rollback to 12.10 and re-configure my whole environment - Office network/power grid is insufficient for the current population, I'll be working from home from now on == Plan == * Continue with CBuild for LLVM * Setup continuous build for bootstrap+test-suite * Automate Phoronix, setup CI * If CBuild is done, try running benchmarks with LLVM on it * As hardware become available, set them up as buildbots

12 years, 6 months

alignment trap on small inline memcpy

by William Mills

We are using the Linaro prebuilt binary 2013.03 toolchain. We have a program that does a memcpy of 6 bytes and the source and destination pointers are both 6 byte arrays (through multiple levels of struct & union etc). At -O2 we get the memcpy inlined. The code area in question is: 22840: f8b7 2054 ldrh.w r2, [r7, #84] ; 0x54 22844: f853 1d12 ldr.w r1, [r3, #-18]! 22848: f042 0202 orr.w r2, r2, #2 2284c: 889b ldrh r3, [r3, #4] 2284e: b292 uxth r2, r2 ->22850: f8c7 101a str.w r1, [r7, #26] 22854: f8a7 2054 strh.w r2, [r7, #84] ; 0x54 22858: 83fb strh r3, [r7, #30] 2285a: f8da 3000 ldr.w r3, [sl] And we get an alignment fault at the str.w marked above. Looking at the types involved and their location in the containing structures I don't see how the compiler could think that the destination was word aligned (I believe it is guaranteed that dest % 8 == 6) There are no -march -mcpu or -mtune params passed to the compiler. The code is running in user space on a A15. Basic question before we look further: Is the compiler assuming that cp15 SCTLR.A is 0 so that it is free to generate unaligned loads and stores? If the answer to the above is "no" we can isolate the code more and bring it back to the list. Thanks, Bill --------------------------------------- William A. Mills Chief Technologist, Open Solutions, SDO Texas Instruments, Inc. 20450 Century Blvd Germantown MD 20878 240-643-0836

12 years, 6 months

[ANNOUNCE] Linaro Toolchain binaries 2013.05 released

by Bernhard Rosenkränzer

The Linaro Toolchain and Platform Working Groups are pleased to announce the 2013.05 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 2013.05 * 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: * gcc 4.7 is no longer included * gdb is updated to 7.6 * Linux release file names no longer include a date to make life easier for scripted downloads * ISL/CLooG support is enabled in all builds 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.

12 years, 6 months

Linaro-toolchain-builds rebuilding sysroot

by BHARATH H S

Hi, I have a usecase where linaro toolchain is used to build my executables and the sysroot is copied and used as glibc for running my embedded system. Reason for this is, I want to use the same glibc what the application is compiled against. I found a bug fix from glibc community which I want to cherry pick and rebuild the sysroot to include this fix. But, in the README.txt published with linaro toolchain binary, there are no instructions for rebuilding sysroot. Can anyone point me to info on rebuilding sysroot? If formal steps don't exist, could you point me to the current process being followed by linaro so that I can observe the build log and attempt to do the same? Thanks Bharath

12 years, 6 months

Malloc usage

by Matthew Gretton-Dann

All, In the Toolchain Working Group Mans has been doing some examination of SPEC 2000 and SPEC 2006 to see what C Library (glibc) routines impact performance the most, and are worth tuning. This has come up with two areas we consider worthy of further investigation: 1) malloc performance 2) Floating-point rounding functions. This email is interested with the first of these. Analysis of malloc shows large amounts of time is spent in executing synchronization primitives even when the program under test is single-threaded. The obvious 'fix' is to remove the synchronization primitives which will give a performance boost. This is, of course, not safe and will require reworking malloc's algorithms to be (substantially) synchronization free. A quick Google suggests that there are better performing algorithms available (TCMalloc, Lockless, Hoard, &c), and so changing glibc's algorithm is something well worth investigating. Currently we see around 4.37% of time being spent in libc for the whole of SPEC CPU 2006. Around 75% of that is in malloc related functions (so about 3.1% of the total). One benchmark however spends around 20% of its time in malloc. So overall we are looking at maybe 1% improvement in the SPEC 2006 score, which is not large given the amount of effort I estimate this is going to require (as we have to convince the community we have made everyone's life better). So before we go any further I would like to see what the view of LEG is about a better malloc. My questions boil down to: * Is malloc important - or do server applications just implement their own? * Do you have any benchmarks that stress malloc and would provide us with some more data points? But any and all comments on the subject are welcome. Thanks, Matt -- Matthew Gretton-Dann Toolchain Working Group, Linaro

12 years, 6 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain