From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2273 invoked by alias); 17 Mar 2012 16:44:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 2264 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Mar 2012 16:44:40 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from www.meduna.org (HELO meduna.org) (92.240.244.38) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 16:44:19 +0000 Received: from [178.143.125.248] (helo=[192.168.130.22]) by meduna.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S8wjU-00086k-Tj for ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org; Sat, 17 Mar 2012 17:44:15 +0100 Message-ID: <4F64BF47.5080004@meduna.org> Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 16:44:00 -0000 From: Stanislav Meduna User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: eCos GNU tools 4.6.2-20120125 ready for testing References: <4F106345.4080902@siva.com.mk> <4F11574D.9070002@dallaway.org.uk> <4F11AC54.7000902@siva.com.mk> <4F1CB41C.90900@jifvik.org> <4F1DA9A0.5070702@siva.com.mk> <4F1FF5AD.4010901@ecoscentric.com> <4F39887A.5050905@siva.com.mk> <4F50F700.5080902@ecoscentric.com> <4F521D6A.4010500@siva.com.mk> <4F52B2C8.4010809@schuilenburg.org> <4F53C46B.4090502@dallaway.org.uk> <4F53FF0D.80107@ecoscentric.com> <4F574D4A.2090407@ecoscentric.com> <4F58EC32.9070103@ecoscentric.com> <4F5B8C70.4080208@dallaway.org.uk> <4F5E204B.5040402@ecoscentric.com> <4F5F4BFE.7030100@ecoscentric.com> <4F5F5691.4090009@siva.com.mk> <4F61AD54.6050201@dallaway.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <4F61AD54.6050201@dallaway.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-User: stano@meduna.org X-Authenticator: dovecot_plain X-Spam-Score: -6.9 X-Spam-Score-Int: -68 X-Exim-Version: 4.72 (build at 12-May-2011 18:13:45) X-Date: 2012-03-17 17:44:15 X-Connected-IP: 178.143.125.248:51961 X-Message-Linecount: 48 X-Body-Linecount: 35 X-Message-Size: 2552 X-Body-Size: 1388 X-Received-Count: 1 X-Recipient-Count: 1 X-Local-Recipient-Count: 1 X-Local-Recipient-Defer-Count: 0 X-Local-Recipient-Fail-Count: 0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-03/txt/msg00035.txt.bz2 On 15.03.2012 09:50, John Dallaway wrote: >> I tried to build and run "thumb" tests for NXP ARM7TDMI (LPC2294) using >> corresponding RedBoot/GDB >> >> ecos-v3_0-branchpoint GCC 4.3.2 most of tests failed >> ecos AnonCVS GCC 4.3.2 most of tests failed >> ecos AnonCVS GCC 4.6.2 most of tests failed >> ecos AnonCVS GCC 4.6.3 most of tests failed >> >> Thus, it looks like that GCC 4.6.2 is not point of those fails. FWIW, I am using a self-compiled gcc 4.5.2 / binutils 2.21.51.0.5 (AFAIR with apatch in as for one regression) with a Cortex-M3 (thumb-2 only) TI Stellaris processor without any problems. So if there is any general problem regarding thumb, it either does not affect thumb-2, or is platform specific, or is a regression in 4.6.x. > Enabling CYGHWR_THUMB should be sufficient. Be sure to "make clean" when > switching to Thumb. Also, check that the -mthumb and -mthumb-interwork > flags are definitely present during the building of your eCos tests. Out of curiosity, why thumb-interwork? As long as everything is compiled with -mthumb, according to gcc docs it is actually contraproductive, isn't it? Maybe this is also the factor. > There could be a Thumb-related issue within a certain variant/platform > HAL or device driver package. Looks more probable to me. Regards -- Stano