From: Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] omniorb: cleanup autobuild failure, CFLAGS issue
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 22:41:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <524B3391.5020907@mind.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OF8984387D.63FADA60-ON86257BF7.006A9834-86257BF7.006B779D@rockwellcollins.com>
On 10/01/13 21:33, Matthew Weber wrote:
> Arnout Vandecappelle<arnout@mind.be> wrote on 10/01/2013 11:30:04 AM:
[snip]
>>> > >+# Defaulting long double support to a safe option for the
>>> > >+# mix of embedded targets, this could later be automated
>>> > >+# based on checking the capability of the cross toolchain
>>> > >+# for "__LONG_DOUBLE_128__". Currently the host and target
>>> > >+# need to match because of the code generation done by the
>>> > >+# host tools during the target compile (ie headers generated
>>> > >+# on host are used in target build).
>> >
>> > Ouch, this smells like there could also be an issue when the host and
>> >the target have different data representations (e.g. endianness or
>> >bitwidth). Do you think there is a risk of this?
>
> I don't believe there is a risk if I also disable it on the host
> (which I'll add in my next update).
That's not what I meant. For longdouble it's fine because it's
disabled. However, you are building the omniidl with native compilation,
and you use that to generate some source code for the target (at least
that's what I understand). My guess is that this is used to generate the
(de)serialization code of the RPC. However, if omniorb is so bad at
cross-compilation, there is a risk that they didn't consider that the
endianness and bitwidths of the generated code may be different from the
endianness and bitwidths that are detected during native compilation.
So to be sure, it should be tested on a big-endian target if the
generated code works correctly. Bitwidths are even trickier to test...
Regards,
Arnout
--
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-01 20:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-27 19:54 [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] omniorb: cleanup autobuild failure, CFLAGS issue Matt Weber
2013-10-01 16:30 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-10-01 19:33 ` Matthew Weber
2013-10-01 20:41 ` Arnout Vandecappelle [this message]
2013-10-01 21:30 ` Matthew Weber
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=524B3391.5020907@mind.be \
--to=arnout@mind.be \
--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