Hi all,
I was recently hired by CodeSourcery and have been assigned to Linaro
for the purpose of improving OpenOCD.
Specifically, I will be adding new support for Cortex-A9 SMP, though I
may also make a few improvements to its handling of Cortex-A8 in the
process. If you have experience using OpenOCD in these contexts, let me
know if you have any specific requests for features or fixes, and I will
try to fold them into my plans.
After this cross-posted introduction, I believe that most of my
correspondence will appear on the Toolchain mailing list, but I wanted
to make sure that everyone knows that they can find me there.
Cheers,
--
Zach Welch
CodeSourcery
zwelch(a)codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x743
The Linaro Toolchain Working Group is pleased to announce the release
of both Linaro GCC 4.4 and Linaro GCC 4.5.
Linaro GCC 4.4 is the third release in the 4.4 series. Based off the
latest GCC 4.4.4, it pulls in the pre-4.4.5 changes made by the FSF
over the last six months.
Linaro GCC 4.5 is the second release in the 4.5 series. Based off the
latest GCC 4.5.1, it finishes the merge of many ARM-focused
performance improvements and bug fixes.
Interesting changes include:
* Improved performance on the Cortex-A9
* Backports of a range of performance improvements from mainline
* New inline versions of the GCC builtin sync primitives
Downloads are available from the Linaro GCC page on Launchpad:
https://launchpad.net/gcc-linaro
Also available is an early release of optimised string routines for
the Cortex-A series, including a mix of NEON and Thumb-2 versions of
memcpy(), memset(), strcpy(), strcmp(), and strlen(). For more
information see:
https://launchpad.net/cortex-strings
Pre-build packages are available in the Linaro Toolchain PPA at:
https://launchpad.net/~linaro-toolchain-dev/+archive/ppa
-- Michael
Hi,
We are looking for some possible improvements and optimizations on
thumb2 code size. Currently, I am running some benchmarks with
compilation flag "-Os -march=armv7-a -mthumb", and hope to find some
thing interesting that we can improve. Beside that, do you have some
ideas on this topic? or do you have some observations on thumb2 code
that we may probably improve the size?
Any thoughts on this are appreciated.
Yao
I think that it is easier to describe situation in email then on irc.
Currently there are 4 packages related to cross compilation support:
- armel-cross-toolchain-base (a-c-t-base in short)
- gcc-4.4-armel-cross
- gcc-4.5-armel-cross
- gcc-defaults-armel-cross
Each of them got into archive but they need to be updated to get installable
packages.
Status of each package:
1. a-c-t-base is at 1.47 in archive and was built from gcc-4.5-source
4.5.1-6ubuntu1 version. This package is used to bootstrap armel cross
toolchain and generates:
- binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi (from binutils-source)
- libc6(-dev,-dbg)-armel-cross (from eglibc-source)
- linux-libc-dev-armel-cross (from linux-source-2.6.35)
- gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi-base, libgcc1(-dbg)-armel-cross (from
gcc-4.5-source)
libgcc1* packages have /usr/share/doc/ directories as symlinks to
/usr/share/doc/gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi-base/
I have a version which does not provide gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi-base
package, libgcc(-dbg)-armel-cross depends on gcc-4.5-base and have
/usr/share/doc/ directories pointing into gcc-4.5-base one. Need to fix
this symlink by providing those files in libgcc1 package instead.
2. gcc-4.4-armel-cross is at 1.36 in archive and was built with gcc-4.4-source
4.4.4-14ubuntu4 version. This package provides compilers,
libstc++6-4.4-(dev,dbg,pic)-armel-cross, libmudflap0-4.4-dev-armel-cross
and gcc-4.4-arm-linux-gnueabi-base packages.
I have 1.38 version ready to upload which fixes #637454 #640298 bugs.
3. gcc-4.5-armel-cross is at 1.35 in archive and was built with gcc-4.5-source
4.5.1-7ubuntu1 version. This package provides compilers and runtime
libraries. But it does not provide libgcc1(-dbg)-armel-cross and
gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi-base because they are in a-c-t-base source
package. All resulting packages have /usr/share/doc/ directories pointing
into gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi-base one which is policy violation.
I have 1.37 version ready to upload which fixes #637454 #640298 bugs and
provides gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi-base package so policy violation is
removed.
4. gcc-defaults-armel-cross is at 1.3 in archive and does not require any
changes.
Main problem is that packages generated from gcc-4.5-source are split into two
packages: armel-cross-toolchain-base (libgcc1(-dbg)-armel-cross) and
gcc-4.5-armel-cross (all the rest). This was required to allow to bootstrap
cross compiler but gives problems when one is built with other version of
gcc-4.5-source then other - resulting packages are not installable (we have it
now in archive). It is also a thing which Matthias does not like and I
understand it. For now my only solution is to build both with one version of
gcc-4.5-source.
What are your opinions?
http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/download/ubuntu/ is download link for
mentioned versions.
Regards,
--
JID: hrw(a)jabber.org
Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz
xf. http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-toolchain/2010-August/000069.html
> It is not upstreamable due to copyright issues, but we have a policy
> that we can keep such patches, if we wish.
I wrote this patch. If I am the copyright issue, then there is no issue.
I have a copyright assignment for all my GCC work to the FSF. That
assignment also covers the patch in the e-mail stored at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-12/msg00199.html. I consider
copyright to all my patches assigned to the FSF if I have submitted
the patches to gcc-patches(a)gcc.gnu.org, or attached them to a Problem
Report in GCC bugzilla, or both.
The only reason why this patch for GIMPLE PRE is not in the FSF GCC
already, is that I just never cared enough to pursue it. GCC is just a
hobby for me, and experimenting with ideas is fun. Doing all the
required testing for inclusion in the FSF GCC is not fun and it costs
time that I usually can't find. I am just too busy with other things
to clear off this and other pending patches/ideas from my TODO list
:-)
If you wish to submit this patch for the FSF GCC, please feel free to
do so. In fact, I'd encourage you to do so. Likewise for my patch for
e.g. http://gcc.gnu.org/PR20070, and for the GIMPLE hoisting pass.
Ciao!
Steven
Hi,
about the status of binutils testsuite Thumb coverage (CS204 in the
workplan), I have filed two Launchpad bugs:
#640263: Testsuite coverage: Thumb-2 VFP/NEON encodings
https://bugs.launchpad.net/binutils-linaro/+bug/640263
#640272: Testsuite coverage: Thumb relocations
https://bugs.launchpad.net/binutils-linaro/+bug/640272
To summarize: I currently do not see any testing of Thumb-2 VFP/NEON
encodings; Thumb mode relocations are also only barely tested in the ld
testsuite.
Also, please inform if there are any other areas of binutils Thumb
testing that may be of concern to Linaro.
Thanks,
Chung-Lin
* Goal
Goal of this work is to look for thumb2 code size improvements on FSF
GCC trunk.
* Methodology
** Build FSF GCC trunk w/ and wo/ hardfp, run benchmarks including
eembc, spec2000, and dhrystone, and check asm code to see if there is
any possible improvements on size.
** Get input and suggestion from ARM experts.
** Search open PRs in GCC bugzilla.
* Results
Each item has been tracked on launchpad, and is listed with some elements,
** Cause: cause of this problem is known or unknown
** Difficulty: estimation of implementation difficulty
** Recommendation: Yao's recommendation on that bug for next step
1. LP:633233 Push/pop low register rather than high register when
keeping stack alignment
As Richard E. pointed out, it was implemented in gcc-4.5 on 2009, but
Yao still can see the usage of r8 on FSF GCC trunk.
Cause: Might be a regression if problem disappears on gcc-4.5.
Difficulty: Easy. might not hard to fix a regression.
Recommendations: Fix this regression if it is.
2. LP:633243 Improve regrename to make use of low registers.
Get input from Bernd S. and Julian B. Initial implementation has been
suggested by Bernd S.
Cause: current regrename in gcc treats high and low registers equally.
Difficulty: Medium.
Recommendation: Implement it as Bernd suggested, and do benchmarking
to see how much size is improved.
3. LP:634682 Redundant uxth/sxth insn are generated
Cause: Unknown
Difficulty: Unknown
Recommendation: No recommendation so far.
4. LP:634696 Function is not inlined properly with -Os
In consumer/cjpeg/jmemmgr.c, GCC inlined out_of_memory() with -Os, so
increase code size.
Cause: Unknown.
Difficulty: Unknown
Recommendation: Educate GCC to inline carefully when -Os is turned on.
5. GCC PR40730 LP:634731 Redundant memory load
6. LP:634738 inefficient code to extract least bits from an integer value
GCC PR40697 is for thumb-1. The same problem is in thumb-2.
Cause: Unknown.
Difficulty: Medium.
Recommendation: Fix it the similar way as fixing GCC PR40697.
7. LP:634891 Replace load/store by memcpy more aggressively
Difficulty: Should be easy.
Recommendation: Fix to this problem might be "reduce threshold value
once -Os is turned on".
8. LP:637220 allocate local variables with fewer instructions
GCC PR40657 is about this kind of problem, and was fixed. The similar
prolbme exits on gcc with hardfp.
Cause: Unknown.
Difficulty: Unknown.
Recommendation: No recommendation so far.
9. GCC PR 43721 Failure to optimize (a/b) and (a%b) into single
__aeabi_idivmod call
Difficulty: Medium or easy.
Recommendation: No.
10. LP:637814 Combine add/move to add
LP:637882 Combine ldr/mov to ldr
Possible improvements have been found. No idea how to fix it yet.
Cause: Unknown.
Difficulty: Unknown.
Recommendation: No.
11. LP:638014 Replace memset by memclr when 2nd parameter is zero
Difficulty: Easy.
Recommendation: No recommendation so far.
12. LP:625233 Merge constant pools for small functions
Cause: Unknown.
Difficulty: Medium.
Recommendation: No.
13. LP:638935 Replace multiple vldr by vldm
Some vldr insns accessing consecutive address can be replaced by
single vldm. It is not about thumb2, but related to code size optimization.
Cause: Unknown.
Difficulty: Medium.
Recommendation: No.
--
Yao Qi
CodeSourcery
yao(a)codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x739
Hi there. I've always wanted to mix this:
http://www.futurlec.com/ET-STM32_Stamp.shtml
with some of this:
http://bit.ly/cD0JPS
to control my one of these:
http://www.traxxas.com/products/electric/rustler2006/gallery/3705-3qrtr-Bla…
and it sounds like a good opportunity to dogfood the Linaro toolchain
at the same time. What's the best way to set up a Cortex-M3 toolchain
with an appropriate newlib and libgcc?
A wrapper script works fine but I need a way of recompiling libgcc for
the Cortex-M series. I'd love to get a arm-none-eabi toolchain
package out of this that others could use. Could I re-work the cross
packaging to use newlib and change the configure flags instead? Are
there existing Debianised cross packages that I could reuse?
Ta,
-- Michael
Hi Andrew. Well, the builds are done and they're OK. I've added the
ability to compare against an explicit release to make checking
regressions easier.
4.4 results are here:
http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/testcompare/gcc-linaro-4.4-2010.09-1/logs…http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/testcompare/gcc-linaro-4.4-2010.09-1/logs…http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/testcompare/gcc-linaro-4.4-2010.09-1/logs…
i686 and x86_64 have not regressed since 2010.08.
On arm, and ignoring the limits test, 2010.09 adds a failure on
gcc.c-torture/compile/991026-2.c. According to the log the run timed
out but I can't reproduce it.
4.5 results are here:
http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/testcompare/gcc-linaro-4.5-2010.09-0/logs…http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/testcompare/gcc-linaro-4.5-2010.09-0/logs…http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/testcompare/gcc-linaro-4.5-2010.09-0/logs…
i686 has not regressed since 2010.08. x86_64 fails on
gcc.target/i386/wmul-1.c, but this is a new tests for new features and
are not a regression against 4.5.1.
arm is messier. The following new failures exist:
Vectoriser related:
* g++.dg/vect/pr36648.cc scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorized 1 loops" 1
* g++.dg/vect/pr36648.cc scan-tree-dump-times vect "vectorizing
stmts using SLP" 1
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-11.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
"vectorized 1 loops" 1
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-multitypes-12.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
"vectorized 1 loops" 1
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-dot-s16b.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
"vectorized 1 loops" 0
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-1a.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
"vectorized 1 loops" 0
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-1b.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
"vectorized 1 loops" 0
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-1c.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
"vectorized 1 loops" 0
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-2a.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
"vectorized 1 loops" 0
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-2b.c scan-tree-dump-times vect
"vectorized 1 loops" 0
* gcc.dg/vect/wrapv-vect-reduc-pattern-2c.c scan-tree-dump-times
vect "vectorized 1 loops" 0
Others:
* gcc.target/arm/neon-load-df0.c scan-assembler vmov.i32[
\t]+[dD][0-9]+, #0\n
* gcc.target/arm/synchronize.c scan-assembler __sync_synchronize
neon-load-df0 is a new test. synchronize.c is an incorrect test as
the compiler now correctly uses the dmb instruction.
Your thoughts?
-- Michael
I would like to announce that my work on armel cross toolchain got to the very
nice point - all packages are available from PPA.
What does it mean to you?
1. no "are you sure to install those unverified packages" messages from APT
2. ability to easily rebuild toolchain on own machines
So if you used my repository from people.canonical.com then please switch to
PPA one:
add-apt-repository ppa:hrw/armel-cross-compilers
Old repository will be available for some time but will not get any updates.
Next step: merging those packages into Maverick release.
Regards,
--
JID: hrw(a)jabber.org
Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz
I've been checking over the benchmarks as a lead up to the 2010.09
release. We're in a good way compared to both 4.4.4 and 4.5.1 for
most non-trivial tests.
* pybench is 10.9 % faster than 4.4.4 and 7.7 % faster than 4.5.1.
* linpack is 46.4 % faster than 4.4.4 and the same as 4.5.1.
* ffmpeg h.264 video decode (with hand written assembler versions
turned off) is 15.4 % faster than 4.4.4 and 1.2 % faster than 4.5.1.
All results are statistically invalid and against poor workloads, but
I'll work on that.
See http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/benchcompare for more.
-- Michael
Loïc Minier wrote:
> I see you moved the wiki page to the public space, thanks
>
> Couple of notes:
> * make sure you use the rename action on the page, I think this will
> preserver history (I didn't check whether you did or not, but I think
> not)
No, I didn't. I use copy and paste. I'll use rename action.
> * add a page at the old location with "#redirect NewPage" or
> "#refresh 0 http://newurl/"
OK, got it. Thanks for your help on wiki.
...are available here:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2010-09-06
A copy and activity reports are included below.
-- Michael
Attendees
• Name Email IRC Nick
Andrew Stubbs ams(a)codesourcery.com ams_cs
Chung-Lin Tang cltang(a)codesourcery.com cltang
Julian Brown julian(a)codesourcery.com jbrown
Loïc Minier lool(a)linaro.org lool
Marcin Juszkiewicz marcin.juszkiewicz(a)linaro.org hrw
Matthias Klose doko(a)canonical.com doko
Michael Hope michael.hope(a)linaro.org michaelh
Peter Maydell peter.maydell(a)linaro.org pm215
Richard Earnshaw richard.earnshaw(a)arm.com rearnshaw
Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weigand(a)linaro.org uweigand
Yao Qi yao(a)codesourcery.com yao
Agenda
• Licensing of string routines
• State of valgrind
• State of GDB
• Open tickets
□ 600298, 616141, 604753: SMP/sync related
□ 605059 4.4.5
□ 629671 ICE in reload_cse_simplify_operands in thumb-1 mode
□ 590696 Wrong use of objdump during cross build
• Upcoming release
• Creating blueprints
Blueprint Assignee
Initial delivery of Linaro GCC 4.4 ams
Cross Compiler Packages hrw
Action Items from this Meeting
• ACTION: Richard to check with the legal department on string licensing
issues
• ACTION: Peter to talk with valgrind upstream re: Linaro releasing a
ARM-focused version
• ACTION: Michael to organise an 'experimental' PPA that toolchain output can
go into
• ACTION: Michael to talk with Cody Somerville re: building on ARM
• ACTION: Michael to set up a GDB 7.2 based off the release tarball
• ACTION: Andrew to pull sync changes back into 4.4 for this release
• ACTION: Michael to assign appropriate sync ticket to Andrew to track the
backport
• ACTION: Andrew to merge the current post 4.4.4 release branch into our 4.4
for this release
• ACTION: Julian to do a basic investigation into 629671
• ACTION: Andrew to merge the cross-compile objdump ticket into this release
and re-kick upstream process
Action Items from Previous Meeting
• ACTION: Michael to re-check with TSC that we can assign copyright but keep
ability to relicense
• DONE: Yao to continue on GDB for a week then switch to investigation
• ACTION: Peter to check into the state and progress of valgrind for the
meeting on the 30th.
• ACTION: Chung-Lin to shift the CSL backport list out onto the Linaro wiki
• ACTION: Michael to see about doing an archive rebuild with 4.5
• DONE: Michael to send IBM's list to Yao
Minutes
String routines:
• Michael asked Richard about getting the current str* routines by ARM
transferred to Linaro
• Linaro will then get these into other C libraries
• FSF prefers LGPL and copyright for glibc
• Linaro prefers MIT/X11 everywhere so that fixes and improvements can be
shared
• Richard is concerned about the copyright assignment and any patent grant
• ACTION: Richard to check with the legal department on string licensing
issues
• Extreme fallback is to re-write the routines to all be under Linaro
copyright. memcpy() and similar may need this
Valgrind:
• Peter has been looking at how it works on the ARM platform
• Upstream is very responsive to issues
• Now works on Firefox and OO.org
• Upstrem doesn't have any particular release cycle
• ARM changes are pretty extensive and can't be extracted
• Peter suggested making valgrind available in a PPA to start with
• NEON detection at startup is remaining issue
• What next?
□ Packaging is straight forward
□ Don't want to steal upstream's thunder or release something
inappropriate
□ ACTION: Peter to talk with valgrind upstream re: Linaro releasing a
ARM-focused version
• Could bring into the Linaro overlay PPA
• ACTION: Michael to organise an 'experimental' PPA that toolchain output can
go into
• ACTION: Michael to talk with Cody Somerville re: building on ARM
GDB:
• 7.2 is now available
• Time to start up a gdb-linaro based on that
• Matthias mentioned that we will have GDB 7.2 on Maverick
• How should we manage the source
□ QEMU is over git
□ Could use bzr or git
□ bzr with Launchpad can't handle multiple branches when pulling from git
□ GDB is unique in how it's mixed in with the rest of the projects hosted
on sourceare
□ Branches as such are trucky
□ Could just base off tarballs
□ ACTION: Michael to set up a GDB 7.2 based off the release tarball
Tickets:
• ACTION: Andrew to pull sync changes back into 4.4 for this release
• ACTION: Michael to assign appropriate sync ticket to Andrew to track the
backport
• ACTION: Andrew to merge the current post 4.4.4 release branch into our 4.4
for this release
• ACTION: Julian to do a basic investigation into 629671
• ACTION: Andrew to merge the cross-compile objdump ticket into this release
and re-kick upstream process
Patch tracker:
• Andrew noted that it is now fully populated with the GCC data
• Has assigned various patches that still need to go upstream to Yao and
Julian
Next meeting is on 2010-09-08 on the public code.
--- Chung-Lin Tang
== Linaro Toolchain ==
* Google ARM patch sets: committed a second set to SG++ 4.5 trunk on
Tues. AndrewS pushed both sets to Linaro. Worked on a third set, those
related to PR42235, but this time regression test results were not so
clean. Will look into, but considering whether to stop the backports
here.
* LP:628526, submitted a patch to gcc-patches for explicitly turning
off stack protection in libgcc build flags, awaiting response.
* LP:601030, eglibc 2.11/12 problem with ___longjmp_chk on x86-64.
Problem seems to be clear, fix quite simple, but so far cannot seem to
reproduce and verify. Also unclear if I should send the fix to eglibc
or glibc, the idea of the latter making me a bit nervous... :P
== libffi ==
* Got an acknowledgement from the libffi maintainer that he'll review
the VFP hard-float support patch soon.
== This week ==
* Look into remaining Google approved patches, mainly those related to
PR42235 and PR42575.
* Try to reproduce LP:601030 and send patch soon.
* Linaro GCC investigations.
--- Andrew Stubbs
== Linaro GCC ==
* Michael has get the new patch tracker into a usable state. I've
transferred all the data from the old wiki tracker, and looked up the
remaining data as far as I can. The new tracker should now be fully
populated with data. It's here, for the moment:
http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/patchtrack
* Start Yao and Julian on the optimization investigation tasks.
* Continue trawl through the CS bugs looking for candidates to push
to the Linaro tracker.
== Other ==
* Public holiday on Monday.
* Attended the monthly CS/Linaro sync meeting.
--- Yao Qi
== Linaro GDB wrap up ==
* LP:615993 gdb.base/sigstep.exp failures
Patch was committed to gdb mainline and 7.2 branch.
* LP:615995 gdb.base/watch-vfork.exp failures
Discussed with Pedro, create a patch, which fixed failures on ARM,
but can't fix failures on x86(they are caused by different problems).
Leave the x86 failures there, and patch is being reviewed in
gdb-patches.
== Linaro GCC ==
* CS306:Investigate on thumb2 improvement
Read/understand previous effort related on code size
improvement from CSL wiki pages.
Experiment with CSL scripts for size benchmarking. With Dan's
help, run benchmarking in a correct/reasonable way.
'Reproduce' some inefficient code mentioned by Julian. Some of them
are still there.
== Misc ==
* LP:605042
Revert one patch, and rebuild it. No seg fault is found.
== This Week ==
* Continue my work on CS306.
--- Peter Maydell
RAG:
Red:
Amber: virtio-system writeup not going as fast as expected
Green: ARM legal OK now received
Milestones:
| Planned | Estimate | Actual |
finish virtio-system | 2010-08-27 | ? | |
I need to replan this (no forward progress this week
because more important stuff intervened)
Progress:
virtio-system:
- actually trying a SATA disk revealed that the PB926 PCI
interrupt mapping was wrong; now fixed after consulting
the schematics and a round or two of patch testing with Arnd
- I have a PB1176 board but it doesn't seem to talk to
the serial port on poweron. Will try a firmware reflash
but it might just be broken...
- no progress on writeup because other things intervened.
valgrind:
- went through the motions of getting a valgrind svn snapshot
into the ubuntu packaging
- tested on pegatron (A8, maverick, thumb2), found four bugs:
+ BX PC not implemented (fixed upstream)
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=249775
+ RBIT not implemented (fixed upstream)
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=249924
+ pwrite64 syscall not implemented (fixed upstream)
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=249996
+ test for presence of neon wrong
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=249775
With a bodge for the last and the fixes for the first 3,
valgrind now successfully runs openoffice and firefox.
other:
- Investigated https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/628471 : qemu-maemo
doesn't work with new linaro beagleboard kernels. It looks
like we now try to probe for NAND (which failed earlier
for other reasons which I suspect are a now-fixed bug),
and qemu-maemo's NAND implementation doesn't map anything at
the address the nand code is trying to poll for a status bit.
- first post to qemu-devel :-) (review of somebody's
patch to not confuse SMC with BKPT in the arm decoder)
Plans:
virtio-system:
- hoping to get the qemu patches into the ubuntu qemu-maemo
package, which will avoid the need to talk about patching qemu
- finish the writeup and put it on the wiki
- test PCI patches on PB1176
valgrind:
- respin a valgrind with proper fixes for everything and
put it in a PPA somewhere
other:
- come up with some fix or workaround for #628471
- put the rebased ubuntu qemu-maemo work up onto gitorious
so other people can see it
Absences:
Friday 5 November and 20 other days in this calendar year
Looks good. I've created a real project, added a README/LICENSE, and
merged your changes. See:
https://launchpad.net/tcwg-web
There was a funny render difference between Firefox and Chromium -
revisions with no bugs lead to a rowspan of zero which Firefox doesn't
like. I also pulled some common code out into a function and used the
built-in variable 'loop'. 'loop' is quite nice as it provides values
like .index, .first, .odd, and so on based on your position in the
loop.
-- Michael
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Andrew Stubbs <ams(a)codesourcery.com> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> I've been playing with you patch tracker, and come up with this:
>
> https://code.launchpad.net/~ams-codesourcery/+junk/tcwg-web
>
> I don't seem to be able to propose an official merge request to your branch,
> but it's just a quick implementation anyway, and could probably be cleaned
> up.
>
> The patch renders each ticket in it's own row (without changing the way the
> first two columns are rendered). This means they can have their own colour
> and we can maybe see better what status goes with what bug.
>
> To see an example of what it does, see revision 4.4:93544
>
> Andrew
>
I want to share status of my cross compiler packages work with all of you.
Some time ago I did a split of them into two:
- armel-cross-toolchain-base (1.36 now)
- armel-cross-toolchain (1.29 now)
Where first one provides binutils, linux headers, libc6 and libgcc
packages. Second provides final gcc.
Today I got a-c-t-base to a moment when it builds fine on PPA [1]. 1.36 got
sent for rebuild to fix missing gcc-4.5-arm-linux-gnueabi-base package. When
it will build then a-c-toolchain package will get uploaded for build.
Result will deprecate my current repository at people.canonical.com [2]
because PPA gives signed repository.
On Monday I will probably have to update both components because there was
gcc-4.4 upload so probably gcc-4.5 will follow (so I will be able to drop one
patch).
Additionally I made 'gcc-defaults-armel-cross' package (available in [1])
which makes installing of cross compilers a bit easier (no need to worry which
version to install - just "apt-get install gcc-arm-linux-gnueabi" is enough).
Selection of cross gcc version is done in other way then native one. Native is
using "gcc" package which contains /usr/bin/gcc as symlink to /usr/bin/gcc-4.4
file. Cross gcc uses "update-alternatives" to setup /usr/bin/arm-linux-
gnueabi-gcc file. I want to fix it in 11.04 so cross gcc will use same method
as native one.
1. https://edge.launchpad.net/~hrw/+archive/arm-cross-compiler
2. http://people.canonical.com/~hrw/ubuntu-maverick-armel-cross-compilers/
Regards,
--
JID: hrw(a)jabber.org
Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz
Michael,
a quick update to our discussion today: actually, GDB 7.2 has already been
released earlier today:
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-announce/2010/msg00003.html
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards
Ulrich Weigand
--
Dr. Ulrich Weigand | Phone: +49-7031/16-3727
STSM, GNU compiler and toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell/B.E.
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter | Geschäftsführung: Dirk
Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen | Registergericht: Amtsgericht
Stuttgart, HRB 243294
Hi Alexander. I've looked into the problem and the linker error is
caused by a mix of stack protector options between libgcc and the C
library.
GCC includes a feature called the stack smashing protector which
detects writing past the end of a stack based object. It's quite nice
as it gives decent protection against buffer overruns which are the
most common type of security vulnerability.
The implementation is straight forward: when compiled with
-fstack-protector, any function with a stack-based character array
will have extra stack checking code inserted into the prologue and
epilogue. The prologue allocates a canary value at the top of stack
and fills it in with the value of '__stack_chk_guard' provided by
libssp. The epilogue checks this value and calls `__stack_chk_fail`
if it has been changed. The stack protector can interfere with some
code and isn't applicable in others.
The problem here is caused by a stack up of things:
* glibc knows about -fstack-protector and turns it on and off for
different functions and libraries
* gcc knows about -fstack-protector and includes libssp if required
* glibc knows about libgcc and statically links against it to ensure
availability
* Meego seems to turn on -fstack-protector by default (as does Ubuntu)
This results in the libgcc function '_gcc_Unwind_Backtrace' being
built with the stack protector and the glibc library 'libanl' without.
At static link time GCC sees that the stack protector is off and
skips linking against libssp, causing the missing symbol error.
The solution is to add -fno-stack-protector to the libgcc build
options and rebuild the compiler. I've heard (but can't track down
the link) that the ARM libgcc unwind functions must be built this way
in any case.
See
http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/gcccvs/branches/sid/gcc-4.5/debian/patches/gcc-d…
for how Debian does this.
Hope that helps,
-- Michael
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 9:06 PM, <Alexander.Kanevskiy(a)nokia.com> wrote:
> Hi Michael.
>
> I've created for you account in MeeGo OBS (build system that we use in MeeGo
> is OpenSuSE build system)
>
> login: michaelh
> password: wog-feg-da
> Web client url: https://build.meego.com
> API url: https://api.meego.com
>
> The build log that had problem with glibc 2.12 + gcc 4.5 you can find here:
>
> https://build.meego.com/package/live_build_log?arch=armv7el&package=glibc&pr
> oject=home%3Akad%3Abranches%3ATrunk%3ATesting&repository=standard
>
> Might be you have some idea what went wrong, as our toolchain people were
> not able to find why combination of latest gcc plus glibc 2.11.x works, but
> not gcc 4.5 + glibc 2.12.0 :(
>
> This log is from my home project inside OBS, where stuff is already a bit
> outdated. I'll ask Jan-Simon from Linux Fundation to point to right place
> where latest builds are present, so you can experiment with them.
>
> --
> Best regards, Alexander Kanevskiy.
>
>
>
Hi all,
I've just discovered that Ubuntu is not using the Linaro release
information in the --version string. This is not ideal when we get bug
reports as it makes it hard to understand what Linaro release to use to
reproduce the issue.
Therefore, I've created a new wiki page to track the mappings:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/VersionMappings
For now this only applies to GCC, but no doubt other tools will follow.
Please help keep it up to date if you find a version is missing. I've
added it to the GCC release process wiki page, so hopefully it should
get looked at at least once a month.
Andrew
Hi there. We have a Toolchain WG has a Versatile Express board coming
our way. It's a quad-core Cortex-A9 with 1 GB of RAM, so quite decent
really.
Does anyone have a pressing need for it? If not then I'll take it and
make it available over SSH.
-- Michael
Please find the activity reports and minutes for Monday's meeting
below. The minutes are also available at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2010-08-23
Minutes from the Wednesday and Friday standup calls are at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2010-08-18https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2010-08-20
-- Michael
Attendees
• Name Email IRC Nick
Andrew Stubbs andrew.stubbs(a)linaro.org ams
Chung-Lin Tang cltang(a)codesourcery.com cltang
Matthias Klose doko(a)canonical.com doko
Michael Hope michael.hope(a)linaro.org michaelh
Peter Maydell peter.maydell(a)linaro.org pm215
Richard Earnshaw richard.earnshaw(a)arm.com rearnshaw
Yao Qi yao.qi(a)linaro.org yao
Agenda
• Open tickets
□ 616141 Backport the sync_* primitive fixes
□ 590696 fix wrong use of objdump during cross build
□ 600277 Backport ARM Cortex A9 scheduling changes
□ 605059 Merge 4.4.5
• Upcoming release
□ GCC 4.4
□ GCC 4.5
□ GDB
□ Strings
• 4.6 backport approach
• Creating blueprints
• Connecting with other groups
Blueprint Assignee
Initial delivery of Linaro GCC 4.4 ams
Cross Compiler Packages hrw
Action Items from this Meeting
• ACTION: Chung-Lin to move the list of other backports out of the CSL wiki
and into Linaro
• ACTION: Michael to re-check with TSC that we can assign copyright but keep
ability to relicense
• ACTION: Yao to continue on GDB for a week then switch to investigation
• ACTION: Peter to check into the state and progress of valgrind for the
meeting on the 30th.
Action Items from Previous Meeting
Minutes
Tickets:
• Went through the open tickets in the agenda
• Andrew will backport the SMP changes, including the sync primitives
• Andrew will backport the A9 changes
□ Most of the changes should come through easily
□ There is a write after write hazard
□ Currently uses the new cost infrastructure
□ Backport the cost infrastructure if it will be used further in the
future
4.6 branch:
• Andrew suggested starting a 4.6 branch after the start of stage 3
□ Start landing patches early
□ When FSF 4.6.0 comes out, we will have a corresponding Linaro 4.6.0
• ACTION: Chung-Lin to move the list of other backports out of the CSL wiki
and into Linaro
String routines:
• Richard asked about the response
• Michael had replies from Roland McGrath (http://sourceware.org/ml/
libc-alpha/2010-08/msg00029.html) but not the wider gcc-sc
• All other architectures are LGPL and FSF assigned
• The current approach is to assign a particular version to glibc
• Could cause a small maintenance problem in the future
• Richard isn't sure that we can assign copyright of a particular version
• ACTION: Michael to re-check with TSC that we can assign copyright but keep
ability to relicense
4.6 backports:
• Talked about the approach for backporting 4.6 features
• Won't backport every single change as then Linaro 4.5 becomes FSF 4.6
• Backport correctness fixes as the problem is found
• Backport performance changes as they occur
• Discussed how upstream could be tracked
□ Notification of any CSL or ARM authered changes will come from them
□ All changes are supposed to go through gcc-patches
□ Andrew notes that gcc-cvs provides a filtered view of what actually
landed
□ At least monitor these lists and search for ARM|Thumb|NEON|XSCALE|
Cortex|Coretx|VFP|Snapdragon|OMAP
Michael noted that IBM are interested in the ARM compiler and plan to get
involved soon.
Michael has asked again for A9 hardware. No news yet.
Future:
• Would like to spend some time soon running invetigrations to spit out some
blueprints
• ACTION: Yao to continue on GDB for a week then switch to investigation
• Andrew noted that there is one more person to come from CSL
• Will ask that person to do investigation
• Richard is keen to see the blueprints to check against what ARM is doing
□ Michael asked for information about their planning process so that we
can line things up
Valgrind:
• Peter noted that the valgrind changes have been committed upstream
• ACTION: Peter to check into the state and progress of valgrind for the
meeting on the 30th.
Next meeting is a stand-up meeting on 2010-08-25 on the public code.
--- Andrew Stubbs
== GCC 4.5 ==
* Continued pushing 4.5 patches to Linaro. I have now caught up with
current development I think.
* Lots of discussion on the patch tracker. You'd think it was more
important than the compiler .... :(
== Upstream ==
* Did before and after tests of the Coretex-A5 scheduler against
upstream HEAD. All seemed well (or at least, no worse) so I've posted
the patch upstream. No word back yet ....
--- Chung-Lin Tang
== Hard-float ==
* Testing EEMBC softfp vs. hard-float calling convention performance numbers.
* The only conclusive result was that OAmark is 2%-3% faster,
presumably due to vector graphics-like code in that suite. May look
into other code (was suggested Cairo) to see if any gain in changing
to hard-float.
* Withdraw earlier comment on small improvements on Automark (was not
apparent after more experiment runs).
* Currently working to produce report files.
== Linaro GCC ==
* Looking at getting into GCC backport work this week.
--- Yao Qi
== Linaro GDB ==
* LP:615997 gdb.dwarf2/dw2-ref-missing-frame.exp failure
Patch is committed to gdb mainline.
* LP:615999 gdb.gdb/selftest.exp failure
Patch is committed to gdb mainline.
* LP:615995 gdb.base/watch-vfork.exp : Watchpoint triggers after
vfork (sw) (timeout)
With Pedro's help, got to know the failure of this case on arm and
x86 are different. Created a patch as Ulrich suggested, and it works
on 2.6.32, while fails in a different way on 2.6.35. Failure is
caused by debuggee process is killed by a SIGTRAP. Still no clue why
that can happen.
== Linaro GCC ==
* My patch to PR45094 is approved, and checked in to mainline.
== This Week ==
* Fix LP:615995 and other linaro gdb bugs.
--- Ulrich Weigand
== GCC ==
* Collected and wrote up suggestions for future GCC work
== GDB ==
* Opened Launchpad bugs for known GDB problems and testsuite failures
* Investigated bug #620595 (gdb.threads/threxit-hop-specific.exp failure)
* Fixed bug #615998 (gdb.gdb/observer.exp failures) in mainline and 7.2
* Worked on upstream fix for #620595 (gdb.threads/threxit-hop-specific.exp
failure)
* Analyzed bug #620611 (Unable to backtrace out of vector page 0xffff0000)
== Infrastructure ==
* Continued working with our order&control team to acquire IGEPv2 boards
--- Peter Maydell
RAG:
Red: None
Amber: ARM legal OK for qemu contributions still pending
Green: we have approval for laptops for linaro secondees
Milestones:
| Planned | Estimate | Actual |
finish virtio-system | 2010-08-27 | 2010-08-27 | |
Progress:
virtio-system:
- got my versatile kernel/qemu running with virtio disk and network
versus non-virtio
- ran some basic benchmarking (bonnie++ for disk, tbench for net).
Disk is faster with virtio, but strangely networking is not!
- tried an upstream qemu too -- net virtio still slower
- built a realview kernel in preparation for testing Arnd's
PCI patches on hardware
qemu-focused-kernel:
- some research into which ARM dev boards support PCI in
hardware, kernel and qemu, to try to find a good choice for
basing a qemu-focused kernel on
merge-other-branches:
- started compiling list of qemu branches for possible consolidation
Issues: the intersection of (recent ARM hardware) (PCI support)
and (supported in qemu) looks suspiciously like the empty set.
Plans:
virtio-system:
- borrow some versatile or realview hardware and test Arnd
Bergmann's PCI patches
- make a start on writing up the config/benchmark results
qemu-focused-kernel:
- flesh out this blueprint
valgrind:
- try to build an ARM valgrind from upstream's thumb branch
Absences:
Friday 5 November and 20 other days in this calendar year
...are available here:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2010-08-18
I'm going to stop sending out emails about the stand up minutes and
include links the weekly minutes instead.
Trick of the day:
w3m -dump https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/Meetings/2010-08-18
| xclip -selection clipboard
...dumps a web page straight into your clipboard for pasting into an
email client.
-- Michael
Attendees
• Name Email IRC Nick
Andrew Stubbs andrew.stubbs(a)linaro.org ams
Yao Qi yao.qi(a)linaro.org yao
Ulrich Weigand ulrich.weigand(a)linaro.org uweigand
Peter Maydell peter.maydell(a)linaro.org pm215
Julian Brown julian(a)codesourcery.com jbrown
Loïc Minier loic.minier(a)linaro.org lool
Michael Hope michael.hope(a)linaro.org michaelh
Chung-Lin Tang cltang(a)codesourcery.com cltang
Agenda
• Standup meeting
Blueprint Assignee
Initial delivery of Linaro GCC 4.4 ams
Cross Compiler Packages hrw
Action Items from this Meeting
Action Items from Previous Meeting
• DONE: Michael to think about synchronising Linaro releases with upstream
• DONE: Michael to organise a call with Matthias, Loic to continue the topic
• DONE: Michael to write up and email patch tracker mechanics for review
• DONE: Ulrich to add his time away to the Linaro calendar
• ACTION: Michael and Ulrich to add GDB new features as blueprints to
Launchpad
• ACTION: Andrew to look into frequent runs of CSL benchmarks
• ACTION: Michael to make sure Linaro has a FSF copyright assignment
agreement
Minutes
• Michael
□ Continuing on patch tracking
□ Continuing investigating string routines
□ Julican noted that using NEON adds power usage and adds a context
switch cost
• Andrew
□ Has a few patches left to go
□ The ones left are a bit curlier
□ Reviewing the upstream state of the current patches
□ Will be sending the Cortex-A5 work upstream
• Yao
□ is continuing with the GDB bug fixes
□ Most are caused by the testsuite
□ Michael noted that we want to make any work we do available early. If
landing on trunk, either backport to 7.2 or note for later pulling into
our branch
• Ulrich
□ Working on bugs such as:
☆ Tracking thumb bit on a long jump
☆ Tracing in the kernel stubs
□ Is currently working upstream
□ Mentioned the ICACHE flush problem seen on Michael's board
☆ ACTION: Michael will try to upgrade the kernel from Angstrom 2.6.32
to a Linaro kernel
• Peter
□ Continues on virtio and QEMU
□ Network benchmark currently shows virtio performing worse than emulated
□ Looking upstream to see if this problem exists
□ Still waiting on approval to release work. Richard will take care of
next week
• Chung-Lin
□ Starting on hard vs soft FP performance tests
□ Testing on a i.MX51 board
□ Michael wants Chung-Lin to finish up on libffi soon
• Julian
□ Working on a vector conditions patch
□ Currently seeing a segfault in compiled applications
□ ACTION: Michael will re-try the build failures that Julian saw by the
end of this week
Next meeting is a stand-up meeting on 2010-08-20 on the public code.
The patch tracking conversation has got a little out-of-hand, and I know
I've misunderstood some of the features Michael has been proposing, and
I suspect vice versa.
So, here's my attempt to compare and contrast the various advantages,
disadvantages, and differences of the ideas so far, by means of use cases.
Looking at this, I think we can probably come up with a solution that
uses the good bits from each (maybe method 1 with the milestone/status
policy from method 2, for example).
Please read the below, and let me know if I left anything out, or if I
misunderstood something.
Andrew
====
For the purposes of this document:
* Method 0 is my original patch tracker, here:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/GCC4.5UpstreamPatches
* Method 1 is Michael's proposed patch tracker, here:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/PatchTracking#Method%201
and here: http://ex.seabright.co.nz/helpers/patchtrack
* Method 2 is my proposed system, here:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/PatchTracking#Method%202
---------------------------------------------------------
1. What does a user have to do to get a patch tracked?
Method 0:
Nothing. New rows are added to the wiki page regularly by a script and
cron-job.
Method 1:
Nothing. The tracking report is updated regularly.
Method 2:
Nothing. New tickets are created automatically, regularly.
------------------------------------------------------------
2. How to find tracking information for a revision?
Method 0:
Search the wiki page for the revision number.
Method 1:
Goto the report page, click through to all the various associated
tickets, if any.
Method 2:
Go to launchpad, and search for "r123456", or select it from the list in
the relevant gcc-linaro-tracking milestone.
------------------------------------------------------------
3. How to find tracking information for a bug fix?
Method 0:
Search the wiki page for the bug number - hopefully somebody has posted
a link. Alternatively, the first line of the commit message will be
present. If that doesn't work, then find the revision number by other
means (bzr).
Method 1:
Go to the bug ticket - it should be there, or a link to another bug that
has it. Alternatively, go to the tracker report page, and search for the
commit message. If that fails try to identify the revision number by
other means (bzr)
Method 2:
Go to the bug ticket - if the bug was committed with --fixes, there will
be a link to the tracking ticket. Alternatively, search
gcc-linaro-tracking to find the commit message. If that fails try to
identify the revision number by other means (bzr)
----------------------------------------------------------
4. How to add new tracking information?
Method 0:
Edit the wiki page.
Method 1:
Add the new information to one or all of the associated bugs, if any. If
there are no existing tickets, create a new ticket (using the link on
the tracker report) and put the information there.
Method 2:
Add the information to the ticket.
-----------------------------------------------------------
5. How to indicate that the bug is upstream?
Method 0:
Edit the wiki page, set the bgcolor to green.
Method 1:
Assign all the bug tickets to a gcc-linaro-tracking milestone.
Method 2:
Mark the bug "Fix committed". Ensure that the ticket has the correct
milestone.
------------------------------------------------------------
6. How to list all patches that need to go upstream?
Method 0:
View the wiki page - the patches are highlighted in red and yellow.
Method 1:
View the tracker report - the patches are highlighted in red, yellow,
and orange.
(Note that launchpad will only list the patches that already had a
ticket attached, or else somebody has create one. This will usually only
include patches where somebody had something to say about it.)
Method 2:
All open bugs in gcc-linaro-tracking.
-------------------------------------------------------------
7. How to list all patches that need forwarding on rebase from 4.5 to 4.6?
Method 0:
Any patches marked in red or yellow on the wiki page need forwarding.
Any patches marked in green with an upstream landing number of 4.7 or
higher also need forwarding. (This information is not yet encoded in the
page, but it's a wiki, so flexibility is not a problem.)
Any patches in grey also need considering. Some are uninteresting
version bumps and such. Some are patches we plan to carry forever.
Probably a new colour could be used to make this clearer - it's a wiki.
Method 1:
Any patches in the report not yet upstream need forwarding. Any patches
in launchpad against the 4.7 milestone (or higher) also need forwarding.
Any patches in the "never" milestone also need considering. Some might
be ancient patches we used to carry in 4.4, but have since been dropped.
Some will be patches we intend to carry.
Method 2:
All patches against the 4.7 milestone, both open and closed (modify the
launchpad search criteria) need forwarding. All patches in the
"series:never,milestone:4.5" milestone in the "won't fix" state need
forwarding.
(Patches we don't intend to carry forward will be "closed", and patches
from 4.4 won't be in "series:never,milestone:4.5", so we never have to
worry about those.)
------------------------------------------------------------------
8. How to we track what patches have been forwarded on rebase already?
Method 0:
It's a wiki, add a column.
Method 1:
Committing the patch on a new branch will (with --fixes) will cause
launchpad to list the commit on the bug page. There's no way to query
this though.
Method 2:
Committing the patch on a new branch will give a "new" patch to track.
The trackerbot will create a new ticket for this revision. The old
ticket will be marked as a "duplicate" of the new one (manually, or
automatically). The new bugs will have "4.6/r123456" in the subject
line, so can be easily be differentiated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
9. What else needs doing on a rebase?
Method 0:
Create a new page with a new table. Forward the information from the old
table manually, by editing the wiki.
Method 1:
Create a new tracker report.
Method 2:
Set up the trackerbot on the new branch.
------------------------------------------------------------------
10. What prompts users to use the system?
Method 0:
Nothing. (Management nagging.)
Method 1:
Nothing mentioned so far.
Method 2:
The bug is always assigned to somebody. They'll be notified by email,
and it will show up on their launchpad pages.
------------------------------------------------------------------
11. What happens when a bug produces multiple patches?
Method 0:
Multiple lines in the table, initially. But, it's a wiki, so they can be
edited, moved around, and coalesced as required.
Method 1:
The same bug has to track multiple patches.
????? How does that work with the 'affects gcc-linaro-tracking' lines?
Method 2:
One ticket per commit. Each is tracked separately, but the user is free
to mark each ticket as a duplicate of the other, and/or move the data
from one ticket to another.
------------------------------------------------------------------
12. What happens when one commit fixes multiple bugs?
Method 0:
Nothing special.
Method 1:
Multiple bugs will track the same submission process. Either the user
must post all the data to all the bugs, or one bug must get (manually)
appointed the master bug, and the others have links posted.
Method 2:
One ticket will be created to track the patch. The ticket will contain
links to all the bugs, and each bug will contain a back-link. This is
very little different to the normal case.
I've fleshed out a potential way of tracking patches at:
https://wiki.linaro.org/WorkingGroups/ToolChain/PatchTracking#Method%201
It's not too bad if you're a developer. The extra steps are:
* Create a ticket
* Mark that ticket as affecting upstream
* Change the status as the patch evolves
* Mark where the patch lands when finished
This is all done through Launchpad's existing interface.
Thoughts?
-- Michael
Sorry about these. Hopefully I'm done.
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Michael Hope <620229(a)bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> Public bug reported:
>
> Related: lp:gcc-linaro/4.5,revno=99360
>
> Code hoisting improvements
>
> Merged from SourceryG++
>
> (Backport from FSF)
>
> ** Affects: gcc-linaro
> Importance: Undecided
> Status: New
>
> ** Affects: gcc-linaro/4.5
> Importance: Undecided
> Status: New
>
>
> ** Tags: revision
>
> --
> [4.5:r99360] Code hoisting improvements
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/620229
> You received this bug notification because you are a direct subscriber
> of the bug.
>
> Status in Linaro GCC: New
> Status in Linaro GCC 4.5 series: New
>
> Bug description:
> Related: lp:gcc-linaro/4.5,revno=99360
>
> Code hoisting improvements
>
> Merged from SourceryG++
>
> (Backport from FSF)
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this bug, go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-linaro/+bug/620229/+subscribe
>