Re: eCos GNU tools 4.6.3-20120315 [Was Re: eCos GNU tools 4.6.2-20120125 ready for testing]

[Ilija Kocho <ilijak@siva.com.mk>]

Hi Lambrecht

Many thanks for your report. This is AFAIK first report for ARM9.

There are warnings indeed. Many have been fixed in current CVS. Can you
please report warnings (and possibly propose) fixes in Bugzilla?

Thanks again
Ilija

On 04.04.2012 14:57, Lambrecht Jürgen wrote:
> On 03/18/2012 08:09 PM, Ilija Kocho wrote:
>> Hi Alex
>>
>> Thank you for testing 4.6.2-20120125.
>>
>> 4.6.3-20120315 is our new test release until we upgrade GDB with Jifl's
>> patch:
>> http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss/2012-03/msg00064.html
>>
>> Ilija
>>
>>
> Hi all,
>
> I finished building our "Passenger Information System" application with 
> gcc 4.6.3 (started with 4.6.2, noticed no difference when switching to 
> 4.6.3).
> Before, we used gcc 3.2.1.
>
> I first built ecos v3.0 without any problem.
> Then I built our application, and it took me many days to solve all new 
> warnings (we compile with -Werror):
> - unused-but-set-variable -> gave me problems with MISRA rule /16.10/ 
> (If a function returns error information, then that error information 
> shall be tested.) Our PC-lint checker forces any return argument to be 
> used, so I had to add __attribute__ ((unused)).
> Also, this warning is annoying for HW drivers: then you sometimes need 
> to read some bit just to trigger some behavior, but you are not 
> interested in the return value..
> - pointer-sign
> - packed attribute (chars are byte aligned by default, so they are 
> "naturally packed 
> <http://www.mail-archive.com/lwip-users@nongnu.org/msg02757.html>". So 
> don't try to pack chars)
> - '#ifdef ... #elif' cannot be mixed any more ('#ifdef ... #elif 
> defined' instead)
> Finally I gave up (for this test) using -Werror because some customer 
> code we use is too badly written (I will wait for their update).
>
> But aside from those warnings, it builds fine, and also runs fine on our 
> AT91 ARM9 processor.
> No issues so far. Do you  know something to watch out for?
>
> Next step is to build the same code version with the old compiler, and 
> see with the eCos CPU monitor if there is any difference.
>
> Kind regards,
> Jürgen
>