Linaro and CS ABI compatibility

Linaro and CS ABI compatibility

[jakes2]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 504 bytes --]

Hello all,

As we all know, the Graphics SDK from TI is done with CodeSourcery's toolchain and Yoctoproject prefers to use Linaro. So, here's the question:
If I copy binaries from Imagination or TI's SDKs to my Yoctoproject - will the binary libs a)work or b)is there some known restriction not to use 'em c)we don't know - try it out.

As it turns out I'm already doing option 'c' but it takes some 4hrs to compile my Yoctoproject with meta-ti from scratch on this computer....

thanks, Jarko


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1625 bytes --]

Re: Linaro and CS ABI compatibility

[Koen Kooi]

Op 21 aug. 2012, om 09:45 heeft jakes2@ovi.com het volgende geschreven:

> Hello all,
> 
> As we all know, the Graphics SDK from TI is done with CodeSourcery's toolchain

I wouldn't be so sure about that


> and Yoctoproject prefers to use Linaro.

Same for the above.

Re: Linaro and CS ABI compatibility

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:45:27AM -0700, jakes2@ovi.com wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> As we all know, the Graphics SDK from TI is done with CodeSourcery's 
> toolchain and Yoctoproject prefers to use Linaro. So, here's the question:

It depends on the version - recent Graphics SDKs were built using so called 
"Arago" toolchain, which is a gcc-4.5.3 based toolchain with Linaro patches 
applied and made form Classic-OE/Arago.

BTW, Yocto Project prefers self-built toolchain, although you can easily add 
Linaro toolchain with meta-linaro layer.


> If I copy binaries from Imagination or TI's SDKs to my Yoctoproject - will 
> the binary libs a)work or b)is there some known restriction not to use 'em 
> c)we don't know - try it out.

As long as you use the same ABI, things should just work for the most part.

-- 
Denys

Re: Linaro and CS ABI compatibility

[Khem Raj]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com> wrote:
>
> BTW, Yocto Project prefers self-built toolchain, although you can easily add
> Linaro toolchain with meta-linaro layer.

There are no ABI differences even though its built separately.

Re: Linaro and CS ABI compatibility

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:39:07AM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> >
> > BTW, Yocto Project prefers self-built toolchain, although you can easily add
> > Linaro toolchain with meta-linaro layer.
> 
> There are no ABI differences even though its built separately.

Linaro's external (i.e. pre-built) toolchain now defaults to hardfp, so still 
need to pay attention to possible ABI mismatch...

-- 
Denys

Re: Linaro and CS ABI compatibility

[Khem Raj]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:39:07AM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > BTW, Yocto Project prefers self-built toolchain, although you can easily add
>> > Linaro toolchain with meta-linaro layer.
>>
>> There are no ABI differences even though its built separately.
>
> Linaro's external (i.e. pre-built) toolchain now defaults to hardfp, so still
> need to pay attention to possible ABI mismatch...

you would use callconvention-hard TUNE_FEATURE in such a case which
would configure
internal toolchain to do hardfp call convention. But yes when it comes
to prebuilt
toolchains a bit of extra care is always good.

>
> --
> Denys

Re: Linaro and CS ABI compatibility

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 01:54:28PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:39:07AM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> >> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denys@ti.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > BTW, Yocto Project prefers self-built toolchain, although you can easily add
> >> > Linaro toolchain with meta-linaro layer.
> >>
> >> There are no ABI differences even though its built separately.
> >
> > Linaro's external (i.e. pre-built) toolchain now defaults to hardfp, so still
> > need to pay attention to possible ABI mismatch...
> 
> you would use callconvention-hard TUNE_FEATURE in such a case which
> would configure
> internal toolchain to do hardfp call convention. But yes when it comes
> to prebuilt
> toolchains a bit of extra care is always good.

Regardless, Graphics SDK comes pre-built and the hard-fp version wasn't yet 
released, AFAIK.

-- 
Denys