package/gcc: remove uclibc-conf patch
PATCH 1/2 package/gcc: remove uclibc-conf patch
This patch is present in Buildroot since a long time and has been rebased onver several version of gcc without beeing upstreamed. Also it only concern contrib/regression, which is not used at all during the build...
As suggested by Arnout [1], a test based on qemu_x86_defconfig has been done without this patch and there is no regression.
[1] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2018-May/222104.html
--- package/gcc/8.2.0/0001-uclibc-conf.patch | 29 ----------------------------- 1 file changed, 29 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 package/gcc/8.2.0/0001-uclibc-conf.patch
package/gcc/8.2.0/0001-uclibc-conf.patch deleted +0 -29
@@ -1,29 +0,0 @@ -From 897881dfdf6a922957c40cbbe9f96bbbe5374770 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 -From: Romain Naour <[email protected]> -Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 22:36:15 +0200 -Subject: [PATCH] uclibc-conf - -[Romain: convert to git patch] -Signed-off-by: Romain Naour <[email protected]> ---- - contrib/regression/objs-gcc.sh | 4 ++++ - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) - -diff --git a/contrib/regression/objs-gcc.sh b/contrib/regression/objs-gcc.sh -index 60b0497fea2..6dc7eadff36 100755 ---- a/contrib/regression/objs-gcc.sh -+++ b/contrib/regression/objs-gcc.sh -@@ -106,6 +106,10 @@ if [ $H_REAL_TARGET = $H_REAL_HOST -a $H_REAL_TARGET = i686-pc-linux-gnu ] - then - make all-gdb all-dejagnu all-ld || exit 1 - make install-gdb install-dejagnu install-ld || exit 1 -+elif [ $H_REAL_TARGET = $H_REAL_HOST -a $H_REAL_TARGET = i686-pc-linux-uclibc ] -+ then -+ make all-gdb all-dejagnu all-ld || exit 1 -+ make install-gdb install-dejagnu install-ld || exit 1 - elif [ $H_REAL_TARGET = $H_REAL_HOST ] ; then - make bootstrap || exit 1 - make install || exit 1 --- -2.14.3 -
Signature · 1 line
2.14.5
PATCH 2/2 package/gcc: remove arm soft patch
The patch refers to [1] which says "Unfortuantely, arm-gcc defaults to generating code for armv5t." Since we always explicitly pass the target CPU for ARM, the default CPU shouldn't matter.
As suggested by Arnout [2], a test based on qemu_arm_versatile_defconfig has been done without this patch and there is no regression.
[1] https://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2008-05/msg00009.html
[2] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2018-May/222104.html
--- package/gcc/8.2.0/0002-arm-softfloat-libgcc.patch | 45 ----------------------- 1 file changed, 45 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 package/gcc/8.2.0/0002-arm-softfloat-libgcc.patch
package/gcc/8.2.0/0002-arm-softfloat-libgcc.patch deleted +0 -45
@@ -1,45 +0,0 @@ -From b05e2b0942d49f9611a92fd2bb2b292f3d486285 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 -From: Romain Naour <[email protected]> -Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 22:46:18 +0200 -Subject: [PATCH] arm softfloat libgcc - -[Romain: convert to git patch] -Signed-off-by: Romain Naour <[email protected]> ---- - gcc/config/arm/linux-elf.h | 2 +- - libgcc/config/arm/t-linux | 7 ++++++- - 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) - -diff --git a/gcc/config/arm/linux-elf.h b/gcc/config/arm/linux-elf.h -index cfcd9cb1a5c..b8a9a9ca4ae 100644 ---- a/gcc/config/arm/linux-elf.h -+++ b/gcc/config/arm/linux-elf.h -@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ - %{shared:-lc} \ - %{!shared:%{profile:-lc_p}%{!profile:-lc}}" - --#define LIBGCC_SPEC "%{mfloat-abi=soft*:-lfloat} -lgcc" -+#define LIBGCC_SPEC "-lgcc" - - #define GLIBC_DYNAMIC_LINKER "/lib/ld-linux.so.2" - -diff --git a/libgcc/config/arm/t-linux b/libgcc/config/arm/t-linux -index 3d520decafb..e7bc042d4e4 100644 ---- a/libgcc/config/arm/t-linux -+++ b/libgcc/config/arm/t-linux -@@ -1,6 +1,11 @@ - LIB1ASMSRC = arm/lib1funcs.S - LIB1ASMFUNCS = _udivsi3 _divsi3 _umodsi3 _modsi3 _dvmd_lnx _clzsi2 _clzdi2 \ -- _ctzsi2 _arm_addsubdf3 _arm_addsubsf3 -+ _ctzsi2 _arm_addsubdf3 _arm_addsubsf3 \ -+ _arm_addsubdf3 _arm_addsubsf3 \ -+ _arm_negdf2 _arm_muldivdf3 _arm_cmpdf2 _arm_unorddf2 \ -+ _arm_fixdfsi _arm_fixunsdfsi _arm_truncdfsf2 \ -+ _arm_negsf2 _arm_muldivsf3 _arm_cmpsf2 _arm_unordsf2 \ -+ _arm_fixsfsi _arm_fixunssfsi - - # Just for these, we omit the frame pointer since it makes such a big - # difference. --- -2.14.3 -
Signature · 1 line
2.14.5
PATCH 2/2 package/gcc: remove arm soft patch
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
"Romain" == Romain Naour <[email protected]> writes:
The patch refers to [1] which says "Unfortuantely, arm-gcc defaults to generating code for armv5t." Since we always explicitly pass the target CPU for ARM, the default CPU shouldn't matter.
As suggested by Arnout [2], a test based on
qemu_arm_versatile_defconfighas been done without this patch and there is no regression.
Quoted 6 lines
[1] https://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2008-05/msg00009.html
[2] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2018-May/222104.htmlSigned-off-by Romain Naour <[email protected]>Cc Thomas Petazzoni <[email protected]>Cc Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <[email protected]>
Committed, thanks.
Signature · 1 line
Bye, Peter Korsgaard
PATCH 1/2 package/gcc: remove uclibc-conf patch
In reply to Romain NaourQuoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
"Romain" == Romain Naour <[email protected]> writes:
This patch is present in Buildroot since a long time and has been rebased onver several version of gcc without beeing upstreamed. Also it only concern contrib/regression, which is not used at all during the build...
Quoted 8 lines
As suggested by Arnout [1], a test based on
qemu_x86_defconfighas been done without this patch and there is no regression.[1] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2018-May/222104.html
Signed-off-by Romain Naour <[email protected]>Cc Thomas Petazzoni <[email protected]>Cc Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <[email protected]>
Committed, thanks.
Signature · 1 line
Bye, Peter Korsgaard