From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Sun Mar 26 22:22:00 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC77D1DF4F for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 22:22:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markmi@dsl-only.net) Received: from asp.reflexion.net (outbound-mail-211-177.reflexion.net [208.70.211.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5CF81E11 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 22:21:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from markmi@dsl-only.net) Received: (qmail 6578 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2017 22:22:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO rtc-sm-01.app.dca.reflexion.local) (10.81.150.1) by 0 (rfx-qmail) with SMTP; 26 Mar 2017 22:22:52 -0000 Received: by rtc-sm-01.app.dca.reflexion.local (Reflexion email security v8.30.2) with SMTP; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:21:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 10776 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2017 22:21:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO iron2.pdx.net) (69.64.224.71) by 0 (rfx-qmail) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 26 Mar 2017 22:21:57 -0000 Received: from [192.168.1.119] (c-67-170-167-181.hsd1.or.comcast.net [67.170.167.181]) by iron2.pdx.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D2154EC770C; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 15:21:56 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) Subject: Re: I had to revert /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd from 2.28 for its bin/ld to work for -r315870 buildworld (adm64 -> arm64 cross build) From: Mark Millard In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 15:21:56 -0700 Cc: FreeBSD Toolchain , freebsd-arm , FreeBSD Ports Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <906EDF27-C387-4188-978F-66B81E31093B@dsl-only.net> To: Li-Wen Hsu , Baptiste Daroussin X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 22:22:00 -0000 On 2017-Mar-26, at 5:07 AM, Li-Wen Hsu wrote: On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Mark Millard = wrote: > Building = /usr/obj/pine64_clang/arm64.aarch64/usr/src/lib/libc/libc.so.7.full > --- libc.so.7.full --- > building shared library libc.so.7 > /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd/bin/ld: getutxent.pico(.debug_info+0x3b): = R_AARCH64_ABS64 used with TLS symbol udb > /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd/bin/ld: getutxent.pico(.debug_info+0x58): = R_AARCH64_ABS64 used with TLS symbol uf > /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd/bin/ld: utxdb.pico(.debug_info+0x5a): = R_AARCH64_ABS64 used with TLS symbol futx_to_utx.ut > /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd/bin/ld: = jemalloc_tsd.pico(.debug_info+0x3c): R_AARCH64_ABS64 used with TLS = symbol __je_tsd_tls > /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd/bin/ld: = jemalloc_tsd.pico(.debug_info+0x146e): R_AARCH64_ABS64 used with TLS = symbol __je_tsd_initialized > /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd/bin/ld: = cxa_thread_atexit_impl.pico(.debug_info+0x3b): R_AARCH64_ABS64 used with = TLS symbol dtors > /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd/bin/ld: xlocale.pico(.debug_info+0x403): = R_AARCH64_ABS64 used with TLS symbol __thread_locale > /usr/local/aarch64-freebsd/bin/ld: = setrunelocale.pico(.debug_info+0x3c): R_AARCH64_ABS64 used with TLS = symbol _ThreadRuneLocale > cc: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see = invocation) >=20 > I also see this on our CI server: = https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-head-aarch64-build/ , this job began = failing since aarch64-binutils upgraded to 2.28 on pkg.freebsd.org. >=20 > Should we revert this change for now? Or the fix is being prepared? I have no clue about any effort to fix the problem. I noticed this after first doing a self-hosted amd64 update. Once I noticed the amd64 -> arm64 problem (the next thing that I tried), I also reverted for targeting armv6/v7 and for targeting powerpc64 and powerpc without testing 2.28 for them. I had to in order to complete targeting arm64 because of the slave-port status that had me revert devel/binutils itself as well. So I do not even know if TARGET_ARCH=3Daarch64 is the only problem area. I've no say in if something like this is reverted but I'd guess that unless the time frame for a fix is known to be rather short it would be reverted until there is an expected-fix available. =3D=3D=3D Mark Millard markmi at dsl-only.net