Re: Blackfin support

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2291 bytes --]

On Friday 09 January 2009 11:22:43 Koen Kooi wrote:
> On 09-01-09 16:52, Tom Rini wrote:
> > Hey all.  Has anyone built any of the blackfin boards recently?  I'm
> > finding things like uClibc 0.9.29+ require -mfdpic which isn't in our
> > gcc 4.1.x, is in gcc 4.2.x (but requires a patch to define __FDPIC__
> > rather than __BFIN_FDPIC__) and other issues still.  Just seeing if
> > anyone else has these things working before I start getting down and
> > dirty.

the FDPIC change is already in mainline gcc and has been for a while

> I keep starting anew with blackfin support due to the current problems:

let's fix this wrong info shall we ...

> * ADI uses their own 'distro', the rest of the world a custom buildroot

actually it's the uClinux distribution that has been around longer than 
buildroot

> * You need to get gcc from blackfin SVN to get something to compile
> * you need to choose either uclibc from blackfin svn or upstream uclibc

things are pushed to the relevant upstream projects, but it's not our fault 
development occurs faster on our side than upstream can make releases

either way, prebuilt toolchains are always available so people need not build 
it up themselves:
http://blackfin.uclinux.org/gf/project/toolchain/frs

> When you get to the point of building uclibc, the fun starts, since
> uclinux (not uclibc) has no proper shared library support

shockingly incorrect.  FDPIC ELF is 100% complete and exactly the same as ELF 
on your desktop.  there is no difference at all from a C API or GNU linker 
perspective.

> so you have to choose an emulation method (fdpic being one of the options).

i have no idea how you're using the term "emulation", but file formats are not 
"emulation methods".  they're file formats.  perhaps try reading this 
documentation:
http://docs.blackfin.uclinux.org/doku.php?id=toolchain:executable_file_formats

>  From that point on it's downhill, since various parts of uclibc have
> fork() in their code

sounds like you didnt configure uClibc properly

> gcc will ICE on other parts, etc.

gcc ICEs on our side a rare and always get fixed quickly.  if you're 
indirectly suggesting the Blackfin gcc port is immature or crap, that is 
absolutely not the case.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 853 bytes --]