From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 3 12:44:36 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 408C9494 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 12:44:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eu1sys200aog134.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog134.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 953BB2918 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 12:44:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com ([74.125.82.172]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob134.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKU94umGg2aLX90QmI6tCjH46LiX96ffFp@postini.com; Sun, 03 Aug 2014 12:44:35 UTC Received: by mail-we0-f172.google.com with SMTP id x48so6408780wes.3 for ; Sun, 03 Aug 2014 05:44:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:message-id:to:subject:cc:reply-to :in-reply-to; bh=mu+bqHKz/T6T7JY6ggi9hgT7Y3tUwsVRJdVyQYzMrBI=; b=XXVMwXRga/E1OmQ0ovyS2qtUoIQBlTMxp+4eOCgs+OznJwAOPpheZ10bM64qcw3nhi Jw3CZfYDUwLSVqp0HCTWxn3e3Ao+631AbxXYZ1wHJnbNI5XwgcJfyIMvs5r4hAL13YYC yVtfQ9iPg0SiqX8l7paKfpWpvIhN8+QWcY4W/sqG7GgZuKn/+w8TmiuTjHpmpq0NIi4E LVFoyMpODOIXU9tCKYc6npq6xC6nhsg04juLWpFxb26I5dtQpfPg9p+Hhy8b4c4a4lH8 eiu/55ItUn7mCGW03TyN+cmG6XlMwk4qYRY8MsPOX0gr2KMl2v34Nlh3hp6Z4h2m2ju0 IYeA== X-Received: by 10.180.10.165 with SMTP id j5mr20591560wib.10.1407060715946; Sun, 03 Aug 2014 03:11:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnD1/HaUOwmvj4kK6RVSl3bjynJGTOe7wHtXKCiTWcLSxYI6sUn+5qb5Ww0gXethdBWpUZBF4zdW/ilNP0K/M7QR7Sz2hdrtuhVVAS24bdXU9qNDQeE1ohEK/k4ldA2DMxdtawx X-Received: by 10.180.10.165 with SMTP id j5mr20591552wib.10.1407060715824; Sun, 03 Aug 2014 03:11:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk. [137.222.187.241]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id lq15sm28436420wic.1.2014.08.03.03.11.54 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 03 Aug 2014 03:11:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s73ABr54079671 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:11:53 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mexas@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk) Received: (from mexas@localhost) by mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.8/8.14.8/Submit) id s73ABrDH079670; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:11:53 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mexas) Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:11:53 +0100 (BST) From: Anton Shterenlikht Message-Id: <201408031011.s73ABrDH079670@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> To: ian@FreeBSD.org, stpworld@narod.ru Subject: Re: Compilation for ARM, patches Reply-To: mexas@bristol.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <1406925525.56408.264.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 12:44:36 -0000 >From: Ian Lepore >Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 14:38:45 -0600 > >Sorry it took so long, but I've finally gotten these patches committed, >as of r269395, thanks for submitting them. You were right about the >nested .fnstart being an error. I learned more about the unwind info >while working on the c++ exception bugs -- multiple .fnstart without >a .fnend in between can't be expressed correctly at all, the tools are >right to complain about that. > >I made some changes to the EENTRY() stuff, if I didn't get it right and >it needs more changes to compile with your newer binutils, just let me >know and I'll adjust as needed. > >I also committed the .arch_extension for ti_smc.S, which actually >required changing our base binutils to recognize .arch_extension (but it >was worth it, because if we start correcting our code now it will be >ready when we update our tools in base). > >-- Ian Just to clarify, is this for clang or for GCC, or both? Thanks Anton