public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [U-Boot-Users] FW: FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize ARM compiler options
@ 2008-02-19  8:59 Peter Pearse
  2008-02-19 12:42 ` Wolfgang Denk
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Peter Pearse @ 2008-02-19  8:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: u-boot

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Pearse [mailto:peter.pearse at arm.com] 
> Sent: 19 February 2008 08:55
> To: 'Ulf Samuelsson'
> Subject: RE: [U-Boot-Users] FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize ARM 
> compiler options
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ulf Samuelsson [mailto:ulf at atmel.com]
> > Sent: 18 February 2008 23:05
> > To: Peter Pearse; u-boot-users at lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize 
> ARM compiler 
> > options
> > 
> > >> " 
> > >> 
> > >> If so I'll put -msoft-float in all arm config.mk files.
> > 
> > Please DON'T!
> > This *forces* you to compile U-Boot with a compiler suite which is 
> > configured to generate soft-float.
> > If you happen to use a compiler which does not support soft-float,
> > I.E: uses NWFPE, then the build will fail.
> >
> 
> Locally remove the option.
>  
> > Also what happens if you have a toolchain built without V5 support?
> > Will the build complete?
> 
> Locally change the option.
> 
> My postion remains that U-Boot is supplied to build with the 
> latest ELDK toolchain.
> Supporting all possible toolchains (and all possible builds 
> of those toolchains) is too much effort. 
> 
> (even including the ARM RealView tools, which would, of 
> course, provide several major advantages ;-) )
> 
> > >> 
> > >> My position is:
> > >> "
> > >> The main (arm) tree processor options should use the correct 
> > >> architecture option for the processor (provided this option is 
> > >> accepted without error or warning  by the ELDK arm
> > >> toolchains) Users using compilers which do not support 
> the correct 
> > >> architecture should be made aware of this.
> > >> Should they wish to use another compiler they can change
> > this option
> > >> locally.
> > >> "
> > 
> > Why not make this user tunable.
> > If you want to mess about with V4 vs V5 support you should, 
> but don't 
> > enforce this for people that could care less.
> 
> Exactly - it builds & works OOB with the ELDK toolchain, no 
> effort, other than installation, for those who dont care.
> 
> Those users who do care can change the code locally to suit 
> their own requirements. 
> 
> If they have sufficient knowledge to care I dont see this 
> being much extra effort for them.....
>  
> And if they want to encourage others to do the same they can 
> document it in doc/README.ARM.config.mk.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Peter

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* [U-Boot-Users] FW: FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize ARM compiler options
  2008-02-19  8:59 [U-Boot-Users] FW: FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize ARM compiler options Peter Pearse
@ 2008-02-19 12:42 ` Wolfgang Denk
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Wolfgang Denk @ 2008-02-19 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: u-boot

Dear Peter,

in message <000601c872d5$c3c00140$9a4d010a@Emea.Arm.com> you wrote:
>  
> My postion remains that U-Boot is supplied to build with the 
> latest ELDK toolchain.
> Supporting all possible toolchains (and all possible builds 
> of those toolchains) is too much effort. 

I disagree here.

We should really try (as we have benn doing all the time  before)  to
make U-Boot build with as many toolchains as possible with reasonable
effort. Of course, each of us can test only a few, and it's perfectly
fine  when  you  as custodian decide to test with a specific a set of
tools only.

But we are definitely open for requests to support othe  rtol  chains
as well - even if we cannot actively help to develop such support.

> If they have sufficient knowledge to care I dont see this 
> being much extra effort for them.....
>  
> And if they want to encourage others to do the same they can 
> document it in doc/README.ARM.config.mk.

We should also accept patches to make U-Boot build with other tool
chains - assuming it doesn't break any of the existing code.

Regarding the soft-float issue: I still think this should work with
any tool chain version, assuming it was configured correctly.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
If A equals success, then the formula is A = X + Y + Z. X is work.  Y
is play. Z is keep your mouth shut.                 - Albert Einstein

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2008-02-19 12:42 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-02-19  8:59 [U-Boot-Users] FW: FW: [PATCH][ARM] Rationalize ARM compiler options Peter Pearse
2008-02-19 12:42 ` Wolfgang Denk

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox