[U-Boot] [PATCH V5] libgcc inclusion from common Makefile overwritable from platform configs files

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>]

On 22:55 Wed 08 Jul     , Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD,
> 
> In message <1247085496-21754-1-git-send-email-plagnioj@jcrosoft.com> you wrote:
> > This patch allow to overwrit the libgcc Makefile inclusion from the toplevel
> 
> Please mind the hints: "overwrit" is a typo. You  meant  "overwrite",
> and  Mike  just  explained  that  "override" is even more appropriate
> here.
> 
> > Makefile by the arch_config.mk files. This is in preparation for the ARM
> > architecture to move away from including libgcc function and only using
> > self-contained U-Boot functions as done in Linux.
> > 
> > Currently all the ARM boards that use the nand are broken due to the adding of
> > the 64 Bit device size support. In the past we have seen problems with different
> > toolchains due to EABI, FPU as example.
> 
> Correct spelling is "tool chains", not "toolchains".
> 
> > With this patch and the following one we move away from all these problems and
> > we will be able to have full control to have a functions embedded into u-boot.
> 
> Please fix the comment.
> 
> In git history, there will be no "following one" patch, and here you
> did not post one either. If you don't have it ready yet, then please
> use a description of what it will do.
the precedent patch still apply cleany so I do not resend it
> 
> And "we will be able  to  have  full  control  to  have  a  functions
> embedded  into  u-boot"  makes  no  sense.  Either it is "a function"
> (singular), or it is "functions" (plural, without "a"). But  what  do
> you  want  to  tell  us? "have functions embedded into U-Boot"? We do
> this all the time by linking them in - we already have  full  control
> over  it  (except  that  it's not working as expected sometimes), and
> your patch does not really change anything of this.
gcc for arm is really boring about abi support and float support
so on arm we do need to control it and be sure about what we use for basic
function and do not use the libgcc provide by the tool chains as we can not
trust them
so for linux as example we implement it correctly and are able to manage
against what armv we want to compile or be comptatible
ditto when we will be able to support Thumb2 as needed for cortex-m3
> 
> 
> You wrote: "gcc does not provide necessarely cored functions". Sorry,
> but I have no idea what you are talking about here. What is a "cored
> function"?
correct function
> 
> 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
> When some people discover the truth, they just can't  understand  why
> everybody isn't eager to hear it.