From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F17FC47073 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC932615D9; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org BC932615D9 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rn2jsLs2DywT; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26316615BD; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 26316615BD Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA5761BF859 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3370424FF for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org B3370424FF X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WBDyOHTdeKoz for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay8-d.mail.gandi.net (relay8-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.201]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D26C424E2 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 6D26C424E2 Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED67B1BF204; Thu, 4 Jan 2024 21:38:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 22:38:23 +0100 To: "Yann E. MORIN" Message-ID: <20240104223823.1bb97896@windsurf> In-Reply-To: References: <20240103102311.4048759-1-abrodkin@synopsys.com> <20240104221941.044adcb5@windsurf> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.38; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-GND-Sasl: thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com X-Mailman-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1704404304; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=CuIBvb3BbK0OwXEc2e6FJm/6dfyn30LjxhQTdIPRqBk=; b=nbLWGUUGQN75/W/CJlKCR1D0bnWzfVhqXsZzy7G4/lBfu7y7iXuXDEjtZ3s583QYeMSFmq jCwwUojVapTcCkiX8gby2tX+gTdQ/DA4HOBlHQA67pMFD2GIzrqwkfYLBDl9OFt1Q/S/9C IJDtpEcuyaEMwD99WwryZ3Yjo9q3EKazSAJegoVrHilulgEqsp/uNe84GfLVwgKgj2QTDt 4+Lvy/cs/dHaBnJ8s/EJTxtKz/8xtJorJqNhrNXkbub6CEC4Ik/0WEEMIfmOnSx60FEty1 642wdcSVe8x+AVNzCGrWu8n2zOprNZBu4WLQ3aNgeqQ0aPLXFviZkOZkeF2loQ== X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=gm1 header.b=nbLWGUUG Subject: Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH] arch: Set max/common-page-size for libgcc & libstdc++ X-BeenThere: buildroot@buildroot.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion and development of buildroot List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot Reply-To: Thomas Petazzoni Cc: Alexey Brodkin , Pavel Kozlov , Vladimir Isaev , Alexey Brodkin via buildroot Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: buildroot-bounces@buildroot.org Sender: "buildroot" On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 22:34:34 +0100 "Yann E. MORIN" wrote: > > But I'm surprised they are not needed also in the C library build. Why > > are you not seeing the same problem with the C library build, it should > > also need the same page size flags, doesn't it? > > It is my understanding that the toolchain wrapper is installed as a post > initial gcc hook as well: > > package/gcc/gcc-initial/gcc-initial.mk: > 59 HOST_GCC_INITIAL_POST_BUILD_HOOKS += TOOLCHAIN_WRAPPER_BUILD > 60 HOST_GCC_INITIAL_POST_INSTALL_HOOKS += TOOLCHAIN_WRAPPER_INSTALL > 61 HOST_GCC_INITIAL_POST_INSTALL_HOOKS += HOST_GCC_INSTALL_WRAPPER_AND_SIMPLE_SYMLINKS > > So the C libraries are built using our wrapper. Hum, indeed. But then, why doesn't that apply to libgcc and libstdc++ as well? It is because libgcc/libstdc++ are built with the second stage gcc, before it is installed and wrapped by our wrapper? I guess so because the first stage gcc isn't capable of building shared libraries, or something like that. So, indeed, my proposal to Alexey is to use ARCH_TOOLCHAIN_WRAPPER_OPTS in gcc.mk. This will allow to get rid of the special -matomic addition. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training https://bootlin.com _______________________________________________ buildroot mailing list buildroot@buildroot.org https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot