From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:25:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:25:38 -0400 Received: from ppp0.ocs.com.au ([203.34.97.3]:9491 "HELO mail.ocs.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:25:30 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 From: Keith Owens To: Jack Steiner cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] /proc/ksyms change for IA64 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 02 Aug 2001 07:42:45 EST." <200108021242.HAA02573@fsgi055.americas.sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 23:25:34 +1000 Message-ID: <6048.996758734@ocs3.ocs-net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:42:45 -0500 (CDT), Jack Steiner wrote: >What problems exist with cross compiling. >We are still using the cross-compiler for all of our building & testing. >We use: > gcc version 2.96-ia64-000717 snap 001117 (plus some patches that Ralf added last Dec). > >I know that at some point we need to convert to native builds but right now we >dont have sufficient bigsur/lion boxes to do that. > >We have not seen any problems with the compiler we are using - at least we >have not attributed a problem to the compiler. The changes to the copy_user pipeline code in the latest 2.4.7-ia64 patch break snap 001117 in some circumstances. There are workarounds but they require changes to code that is not IA64 related, not satisfactory. >Should we upgrade to gcc3.0 yet??? I have not succeeded building a cross compiler ix86 to ia64 for gcc 3.0, using a current CVS tree. The flow insn code breaks on some type conversions in cross compile mode, even when using gcc 3.0 as the base compiler. Debugging is still in progress.