From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [arc-buildroot] [autobuild.buildroot.net] arc build results for 2016-06-19
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:14:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160624091442.6a4f342f@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1466742836.3244.20.camel@synopsys.com>
Hello,
On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 04:34:55 +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> With arc-2016.03 toolchain we're seeing quite a lot of failures here and there.
> That's sort of expected because we switched to binutils rewritten from scratch.
> So we're still ramping up with these new binutils. What is also important these
> new rewritten binutils are in upstream already. I.e. upcoming binutils 2.27 will
> have everything ARC-specific from arc-2016.03 plus some more fixes and
> enhancements that we made since March.
OK, thanks for explaining the situation.
> And what we may do in Buildroot we may either wait for 2.27 binutils to be released
> and then apply [backported from mainline master] patches on top of it to fix still
> existing issues or alternatively we may start using so-called "engineering builds"
> of binutils for ARC.
>
> These "engineering builds" are basically snapshots [that pass internal review and
> testing] made from our dev branch (arc-2016.09) on GitHub like the most recent
> "arc-2016.09-eng004":?https://github.com/foss-for-synopsys-dwc-arc-processors/binutils-gdb/releases/tag/arc-2016.09-eng0
> 04
>
> We'd prefer to go with "engineering builds" simply because we foresee still a lot
> of changes in ARC port of binutils (remember our port is in its childhood currently)
> while upstream binutils see release about once a year. Which means adding fixes and
> enhancements on top of 2.27 release at some point will become a support nightmare.
>
> What do you guys think about all that?
I think at some point we will want to use the upstream version of
binutils if there is ARC support upstream. However, I definitely
understand that the upstream support may not be fully ready overnight,
so I'm fine with using those engineering builds for now, and then move
to using the upstream binutils version for binutils 2.28 for example
(or 2.29 if 2.28 is still not good enough).
Thanks!
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-24 7:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20160620063029.16331102969@stock.ovh.net>
2016-06-24 4:34 ` [Buildroot] [arc-buildroot] [autobuild.buildroot.net] arc build results for 2016-06-19 Alexey Brodkin
2016-06-24 7:14 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2016-06-24 7:18 ` Alexey Brodkin
2016-06-24 22:46 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2016-06-27 8:53 ` Alexey Brodkin
2016-06-27 21:38 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160624091442.6a4f342f@free-electrons.com \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox