From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Zankel Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:45:50 -0800 Subject: [Buildroot] Xtensa in the autobuilders, first build failures In-Reply-To: <20121118232518.091b6154@skate> References: <20121118232518.091b6154@skate> Message-ID: <50AAA88E.3090603@zankel.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hi Thomas, On 11/18/2012 02:25 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > As you have probably noticed, we merged your Xtensa support in > Buildroot a few days ago. I'm really happy that your patches came in, > as it means that the removal of the Xtensa architecture will not be > visible (we removed it during this development cycle, and later > re-introduced it thanks to your patches). Thanks However, I noticed that it was not the most recent version where I incorporated suggestions from Arnout, so will provide a small patch on top of it. > I have also added one Xtensa toolchain configuration in our > autobuilder, and we are therefore starting to see a few Xtensa-related > build issues. Note that this is not at all a blocking issue for now: > when a new architecture is introduced, we expect to have build > failures. I'm listing below the failures we had, in case you have some > time to look at them: > > * Failure to build gdbserver for the target, and gdb for the target as > well, both for the same reason: PTRACE_GETXTREGS and > PTRACE_SETXTREGS are not defined by the kernel headers apparently. > I'm not sure if they are just missing from the kernel headers, of > the ptrace support is missing in the kernel. See: > > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/1d2f307b2aa59bebca3bcb9ea854839f4b1d14fb/build-end.log > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/ec58e302030b8f72b19e9bada16dabb076c60261/build-end.log Yes, I do have a patch for gdb. There are actually two ways to fix it, either in uClibc or gdb. I'm also working with Tensilica to get those changes upstream, so I have to avoid providing additional patches. > > It would be nice if you could have a look at this. > > * Xtensa apparently does not have libffi support. However, it is quite > a bit of work to get libffi support, so maybe we should just mark > libffi as not available on Xtensa (which is quite annoying because > libffi is a dependency for a huge number of packages, but we have > the same problem with other architectures as well). See: > > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/e097c27d38e49d4bf4e07f95c52e995709c08aa8/build-end.log Thanks, I will look into it. > Besides those issues, I'm just reminding you that we are still very > interested in having a Qemu Xtensa configuration to be able to run the > Xtensa systems we generate with Buildroot. I'm juggling between kernel, uClibc, and buildroot, so, please allow me some more time. Regarding patches, should I send them to you and cc buildroot, or only to the mailing list? What's the best path to get them looked at and integrated into the tree? Thanks, -Chris