RE: QSD8250 illegal instruction

[Daniel Walker <dwalker@codeaurora.org>]

On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 20:24 +0200, Le Tama wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> > Also LeTama produced a minimal busybox image. In a certain  
> > configuration it works.  
> > http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/mobile-linux-discuss/2010-May/000087.html
> 
> On my side, here is what I did, all these tests with initrd only to avoid sdcard driver interaction:
> 
> 1) a busybox build with re-compiled executables with Codesourcery 2010q1 toolchain
> - Statically linked executables were crashing, 
> - Dynamically linked with arm v4 stdlib dlls, executables were apparently working. I'm not sure it was luck or a pattern, I didn't test a lots of executables in this configuration.
> - Dynamically linked with thumb2 stdlib dlls, executables were crashing
> 
> At this point, I began suspecting toolchain issue, I tried multiple ones including android pre-built and custom made without success.
> 
> 2) A simple C init executable that forks /execs a simple Write("helloworld") program.
> 	- Again, crashes, with multiple toolchains trials.
> 
> 3) As I thought that maybe my toolchains were not fine with glibc (crashes often in unwind code) , I rebuilt android for QSD8250_FFA, trimmed down init.rc to launch only adbd and debuggerd from the standard android init. This is the one that is producing the reports you saw in the emails. It has been verified successfully on a nexus one with the same kernel, modified to revert htcleo specific clocks and board.

btw, we have added very very basic QSD8x50 support into 2.6.35-rc1 .. So
your welcome to port Leo support (or nexus one for that matter) onto the
mainline kernel and I can push that into 2.6.36 .. It would have to be
fairly basic support tho just booting with initrd and a uart.

Daniel