- linaro-toolchain - lists.linaro.org

[ACTIVITY] 27-31 May 2013

by Venkataramanan Kumar

== Progress == Very short week (monday and wednesday off). * AARCH64 testing Got boot strap failure with GCC 4.9 trunk on open embedded image with glibc changes. Retired with latest openembedded image on V8 model Noted down the steps to reproduce boot strap failure in the model for broadcasting. * libssp support for Aarch64 Read documentation to understand and evaluate the work. == Plan == * Continue bootstrap testing and push patches to GCC * Implement Libssp GCC back end hooks. * Linaro connect travel prep, book tickets hotel and apply visa.

12 years, 6 months

1
0
0 0

[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

1
0
0 0

[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

1
0
0 0

[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for cbuild * Dug into EC2 issues, still confused * Cloned infrastructure files from gcc.gnu.org, which turned out to be out of date, so updated them to the current releases.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

1
0
0 0

[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

1
0
0 0

[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

1
0
0 0

[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

1
0
0 0

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

2
2
0 0

[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

1
0
0 0

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

2
1
0 0

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

3
2
0 0

Debuggin from Eclipse

by Paul Claessen

Greetings, I'm using the Linaro tool chain with Eclipse (Juno) (under Windows) and openOCD to write firmware for an STM32F20x based design (using an ST-Link2 debugger). In general, that all works fairly well. The part I'm having problems with is debugging (step-in, etc) from Eclipse. The execution flow seems chaotic when single stepping through C code: it skips statements, it jumps into the middle of a function, then returns to the start of a function, it loops over certain statements (while there's no loop in the code), etc. (It's close to useless). I have seen this behavior with other IDE's and tool chains when code was built with optimization turned on. However, I specify 'no optimization' (-O0) when I build my code. My questions: a) Is there some implicit optimization being done in the compiler, even though I tell it not to do so, which may affect proper debugging? b) Are other people using Eclipse (Juno) and are they seeing the same issue? Are there any known ways to fix this chaotic debugger behavior? Kind regards, ~ Paul Claessen

12 years, 6 months

2
1
0 0

[ACTIVITY] 21 - 24 May 2013

by Omair Javaid

== Progress == * Performed investigation on gdb7.6 test suite failures and untested test cases. * Updated JIRA enteries with test suite failures on arm to track progress. * Wrote an automation script for selection of individual test cases from a text file. * Got the gdb.dwarf2 test suite patch reviewed from Matt and Will. * Day off on Friday. == Plan == * Finish up initial investigation on gdb7.6 test suite results. * Complete updates of JIRA enteries after investigation on test suite results in complete. * Start work on integration of different testing scripts written in past couple of months. * Send gdb.dwarf2 test suite patch upstream.

12 years, 6 months

1
0
0 0

How to represent conditional compare in RTL?

by Zhenqiang Chen

Hi Richard, After adding some new ops, I can keep the conditional compare to the end of tree-level optimization. As tests, I expand conditional compare to BIT_AND_EXPR/BIT_IOR_EXPR, which still depend on later "combine" pass to combine them. Is it possible to expand it to *cmp_and/*cmp_ior like patterns? What's the expected RTL representation for conditional compare after expand and before combine? Thanks! -Zhenqiang

12 years, 6 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] 21-24 May 2013

by Venkataramanan Kumar

== Progress == 4 day week was ill on Friday. * AARCH64 gprof –c option support. Completed and submitted patch in binutils and got it upstreamed. http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2013-05/msg00265.html http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2013-05/msg00264.html The committer has changed the logic and seems it is not working for backward addresses. Sent him an offline mail to correct it. http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2013-05/msg00279.html * AARCH64 gprof –glibc support. Submitted patch and got is approved http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2013-05/msg00098.html * AARCH64 gprof – gcc support Tested with removing test clause as suggested by Marcus (Aarch64 maintainer). Marcus wants me to send two separate patches. Will be posting it. * AARCH64 testing Got boot strap failure with GCC 4.9 trunk on open embedded image with glibc changes. To confirm it is not a regression I ran with the openembedded image available at Linaro download site. Bootstrap failure can be reproduced. I am documenting the steps to increase the size of image and also Steps to reproduce boot strap failure in the model. == Plan == * Continue bootstrap testing and push patches to GCC * libssp support for Aarch64 * Linaro connect travel prep. Misc ------ Planned leave 29-5-2013.

12 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Week 21

by Yvan Roux

== Issues == * None. == Progress == * LRA on ARM and AArch64: - Reduced the ARM test case. - The issue occurs during the constraints alternatives choice. - Debug still ongoing. == Plan == * LRA, LRA and LRA

12 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Week 21

by Zhenqiang Chen

== Issues == * None == Progress == * Run native regression tests for conditional compare on Pandaborad ES. - Fix several front-end issue to handle conditional compare in error message. == Plan == * Continue on conditional compare. * Linaro toolchain 2013.05 binary release. Best Regards! -Zhenqiang

12 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] 21-24 May 2013

by Kugan

== Progress == VRP based zero/sign extension - Got some review comments for the patch and started addressing them - split the patch into two; 1. propagating value range and 2. do rtl expansion - testing in progress specfp regression - Benchmarked spec2k for A15 with trunk and couldn't reproduce it. - benchmarked spec2k for A9 with trunk and couldn't reproduce between 24th and 28th == Leave == - Monday off Sick == Plan == VRP based zero/sign extension - Send patch for review specfp regression - benchmark for trunk version on 23rd - Resolve regression

12 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] May 6-24

by Rob Savoye

Sorry, this covers the last two weeks, not just one. == Progress == * Created database schema for DejaGnu test results * Created data schema for benchmarks * Wrote scripts to convert benchmark and test data into a form that can be imported into a database, added them to DejaGnu branch * Imported all historical benchmark data * Imported most historical test results (GCC still importing) * Did some experimental graphs of test results * Read lots of web pages to come up to speed on Linaro, registered for lots of web pages and accounts * Learned about Cbuild and LAVA * Started on Cbuild v2 * Installed Ubuntu on Chromebook == Plan == * Write Cbuild 2 design doc * Continue work on Cbuild v2 to be able to use it for the June release * Get remote testing working with Chromebook & foundation model * More support tasks resulting from move off launchpad - rob -

12 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

Debugging in Eclipse

by Paul CLaessen

Greetings, I'm using the Linaro tool chain with Eclipse (Juno) (under Windows) and openOCD to write firmware for an STM32F20x based design (using an ST-Link2 debugger). In general, that all works fairly well. The part I'm having problems with is debugging (step-in, etc) from Eclipse. The execution flow seems chaotic when single stepping through C code: it skips statements, it jumps into the middle of a function, then returns to the start of a function, it loops over certain statements (while there's no loop in the code), etc. (It's close to useless). I have seen this behavior with other IDE's and tool chains when code was built with optimization turned on. However, I specify 'no optimization' (-O0) when I build my code. My questions: a) Is there some implicit optimization being done in the compiler, even though I tell it not to do so, which may affect proper debugging? b) Are other people using Eclipse (Juno) and are they seeing the same issue? Are there any known ways to fix this chaotic debugger behavior? Kind regards, ~ Paul Claessen

12 years, 7 months

2
1
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Week 21

by Will Newton

== Progress == * binutils on ARM testsuite finally green in cbuild! * Tested and pushed to gerrit bionic memcpy patches. * Investigated binutils native AArch64 testsuite failures (not IFUNC related). * Made a start on the DeveloperTools/LibraryPerformance wiki. * Started looking at the Android memcpy problem on Galaxy Nexus. == Issues == * binutils make ; make check takes over 24 hours on foundation model! == Plan == * Respin AArch64 IFUNC binutils patch once relocation number allocated. * Setup git mirrors for binutils, glibc and newlib. * Android memcpy issue. -- Will Newton Toolchain Working Group, Linaro

12 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] 20-24 May 2013

by Christophe Lyon

== Progress == * Disable-peeling: looking at how to have less aggressive vectorization * Libsanitizer/aarch64: initiated upstream discussion * PGO/LTO bug reported by Doko: SD card too small to reproduce the problem * Merges for linaro-gcc-2013.06: started looking at what to backport, started merges * Jira/wiki: started cleanup/collecting new cards * Internal support == Next == * Jira: update status on cards/blueprints backported from launchpad * Merges for linaro-gcc-2013.06: continue collecting relevant merges * Disable-peeling: continue investigating vectorizer behaviour *Libsanitizer/aarch64: look at frame implementation * PGO/LTO: complete build of python * Neon intrinsics: continue improving crc with vuzp/veor

12 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] report week 21

by Peter Maydell

Progress: * misc ** got raring/aarch64 cross build set up ** reducing number of places that need changing for a new qemu target: sent some simple configure patches ** some 32 bit cleanup work that will help with getting John's AArch64 patches to work ** tested Huawei's aarch64 patches and confirmed they work ** rebased qemu-linaro (and passed the results to Serge H for Ubuntu) ** sent patches which make QEMU builds for arm/ppc/microblaze guests require libfdt, since a non-FDT-aware ARM QEMU is becoming rapidly less and less useful Plans: * handover from John Rigby * 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, 7 months

1
0
0 0

[ACTIVITY] Week 21

by Renato Golin

== Progress == * Buildbots - Self-hosting bot online - Fiddling with MCJIT tests to get bots green * Benchmarks - Running Phoronic benchmarks: GCC vs. LLVM, good results - Got a sample of the PerfDB SQLite database, writing some queries * Jira/Wiki farming - Creating loads of new cards, blueprints, sub-tasks - Adding content to the wiki pages about processes, cards, etc * Release 3.3 - RC2 is out, no regressions, already on official repository * EuroLLVM 2013 - Monthly call, wrap-up, preview of next year's == Plan == * Try running a CBuild benchmark with LLVM 3.3 (Rob?) * Automate release process, maybe we can do that every month * Automate Phoronix test (GCC+LLVMrel+LLVMsvn) * Follow up on Panda/Arndale ordering, needed for buildbots * Try to extract useful information from perf database

12 years, 7 months

1
0
0 0

help fighting with optimizations

by Michael Hudson-Doyle

Hi all, I've spent a little while porting an optimization from Python 3 to Python 2.7 (http://bugs.python.org/issue4753). The idea of the patch is to improve performance by dispatching opcodes on computed labels rather than a big switch -- and so confusing the branch predictor less. The problem with this is that the last bit of code for each opcode ends up being the same, so common subexpression elimination wants to coalesce all these bits, which neatly and completely nullifies the point of the optimization. Playing around just building from source directly, it seems that -fno-gcse prevents gcc from doing this, and the resulting interpreter shows a small performance improvement over a build that does not include the patch. However, when I build a debian package containing the patch, I see no improvement at all. My theory, and I'd like you guys to tell me if this makes sense, is that this is because the Debian package uses link time optimization, and so even though I carefully compile ceval.c with -fno-gcse, the common subexpression elimination happens anyway at link time. I've tried staring at disassembly to confirm or deny this but I don't know ARM assembly very well and the compiled function is roughtly 10k instructions long so I didn't get very far with this (I can supply the disassembly if someone wants to see it!). Is there some way I can tell GCC to not compile perform CSE on a section of code? I guess I can make sure that the whole program, linker step and all, is compiled with -fno-gcse but that seems a bit of a blunt hammer. I'd also be interested if you think this class of optimization makes little sense on ARM and then I'll stop and find something else to do :-) Cheers, mwh

12 years, 7 months

3
3
0 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

linaro-toolchain