On 26 August 2016 at 16:18, Thomas Preudhomme
<thomas.preudhomme@foss.arm.com> wrote:
> On 26/08/16 13:36, Thomas Preudhomme wrote:
>>
>> Hi Christophe,
>>
>> On 26/08/16 12:55, Christophe Lyon wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> I've noticed that the new tests fail on armeb. I didn't look at the
>>> detailed logs yet, but I guess you can a look?
>>>
>>> ./ld/ld.sum:FAIL: Input secure gateway import library
>>> ./ld/ld.sum:FAIL: Input secure gateway import library: no output import
>>> library
>>> ./ld/ld.sum:FAIL: Input secure gateway import library: earlier stub
>>> section base
>>> ./ld/ld.sum:FAIL: Input secure gateway import library: later stub section
>>> base
>>> ./ld/ld.sum:FAIL: Input secure gateway import library: veneer comeback
>>> ./ld/ld.sum:FAIL: Input secure gateway import library: entry function
>>> change
>>
>>
>> I can reproduce indeed. I'll have a look, thanks for the notice. Note that
>> Monday is a bank holidays here so might only answer after that if I'm too
>> slow
>> to find the root cause.
>
>
> Doh, the code checks for a SG instruction by comparing the 4 bytes in the
> code against its litteral value. The problem of course is that the read puts
> the 4 bytes of the instruction in memory order but these will then be
> interpreted according to the endianness.
>
> The fix should be easy.
>

Indeed, thanks to your analysis it was quick enough.

Here is a patch, maybe there is a simpler way?

Thanks,

Christophe

> Best regards,
>
> Thomas