From patchwork Wed Jun 26 13:48:08 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Florian Weimer X-Patchwork-Id: 33409 Received: (qmail 96874 invoked by alias); 26 Jun 2019 13:48:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Delivered-To: mailing list libc-alpha@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 96569 invoked by uid 89); 26 Jun 2019 13:48:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-18.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, GIT_PATCH_0, GIT_PATCH_1, GIT_PATCH_2, GIT_PATCH_3, SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=linuxgnu, linux-gnu, 00000000 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com From: Florian Weimer To: Aaro Koskinen Cc: Phil Blundell , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove ioperm etc. support for arm References: <87o93lo3y9.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <20190529135135.rt3c5fhhser7fik6@hetzner.pbcl.net> <875zptqrwx.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <20190529141820.5nny64ugrvqyzqgd@hetzner.pbcl.net> <87r28hpb0l.fsf_-_@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <20190529184028.GC24195@darkstar.musicnaut.iki.fi> <87ef4hp08c.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <20190529201227.GD24195@darkstar.musicnaut.iki.fi> <87imttnewj.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <20190606215312.GB11598@darkstar.musicnaut.iki.fi> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 15:48:08 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20190606215312.GB11598@darkstar.musicnaut.iki.fi> (Aaro Koskinen's message of "Fri, 7 Jun 2019 00:53:12 +0300") Message-ID: <87d0j0lap3.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 * Aaro Koskinen: > Hi, > > On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 11:12:44PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> >> Maybe we used to test ARMv4, and GCC changed under us without us >> >> noticing? >> > >> > Don't know if they have ever changed that, but it would probably make >> > sense to add flags to build-many-glibcs.py to build for the lowest >> > supported arch level. >> >> Indeed. >> >> > ARMv4 is already deprecated in GCC, so probably it's OK to remove this >> > stuff from glibc. Personally I'm concerned about armv4t support as I'm >> > running such systems still with modern glibc. >> >> Interesting. Could you perhaps suggest changes to build-many-glibcs.py >> so that we can build an armv4t target as part of the regular runs? > > Just building with -march=armv4t should be enough for a start. This architecture doesn't have its own target triplet, right? With the patch below, I get this in csu/init-first.os: 00000000 <__libc_init_first>: 0: e12fff1e bx lr 0: R_ARM_V4BX *ABS* But after linking, get this in libc.so.6: 000175a0 <__libc_init_first>: 175a0: e12fff1e bx lr Does this mean I need to pass some other flags as well? Sorry, I'm really not familiar with Arm at all. Thanks, Florian build-many-glibcs.py: Add v4t variant for arm-linux-gnueabi 2019-06-26 Florian Weimer * scripts/build-many-glibcs.py (Context.add_all_configs): Add v4t variant for arm-linux-gnueabi. diff --git a/scripts/build-many-glibcs.py b/scripts/build-many-glibcs.py index c5821df25e..dacd116f8e 100755 --- a/scripts/build-many-glibcs.py +++ b/scripts/build-many-glibcs.py @@ -158,7 +158,9 @@ class Context(object): self.add_config(arch='alpha', os_name='linux-gnu') self.add_config(arch='arm', - os_name='linux-gnueabi') + os_name='linux-gnueabi', + extra_glibcs=[{'variant': 'v4t', + 'ccopts': '-march=armv4t'}]) self.add_config(arch='armeb', os_name='linux-gnueabi') self.add_config(arch='armeb',