Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2014 11:11:53 +0100 (BST) From: Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bris.ac.uk> To: ian@FreeBSD.org, stpworld@narod.ru Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Compilation for ARM, patches Message-ID: <201408031011.s73ABrDH079670@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <1406925525.56408.264.camel@revolution.hippie.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From: Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> >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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201408031011.s73ABrDH079670>