Hi,

I think the problem lies with the precedence of seemingly conflicting
CFLAGS "-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fno-unwind-tables" supplied to my
cross toolchain gcc. I compiled a simple C file with "
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables" , it generated an undefined symbol "
`__aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0'" although compilation was successful without
-static flag. Then I compiled with " -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
-fno-unwind-tables", it still generated the undefined symbol "
`__aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0'". It suggests " -fno-unwind-tables" does not stop
unwind information in the ELF when I have " -fasynchronous-unwind-tables" .
I then compiled with " -funwind-tables -fno-unwind-table", I did not find
undefined symbol " `__aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr0'"in the generated ELF.

So I will compile glibc with " -funwind-table" instead of "
-fasynchronous-unwind-table"
and let you know the result.

Do you see any problem with this approach ?

Thanking You,
-Abhijit

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 1:22 AM Adhemerval Zanella Netto <
adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 15/03/23 11:20, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Adhemerval Zanella Netto via Libc-help:
> >
> >> And I have tested with both:
> >>
> >> CC="arm-glibc-linux-gnueabihf-gcc -fasynchronous-unwind-tables"
> >>
> >> and
> >>
> >> CC=arm-glibc-linux-gnueabihf-gcc CFLAGS="-O2
> -fasynchronous-unwind-tables"
> >>
> >> I also tested with gcc from ubuntu22 to check if this might something
> >> I haven't enabled on my toolchain (since I don't build all languages),
> >> but again I did not see any issue.
> >
> > It probably depends on whether libgcc.a has been built with
> > optimizations or not.
>
> Indeed this looks like
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29621 .
> Does the build work if you manually adds the -fasynchronous-unwind-tables
> on config.make?
>