[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170206102150.GD12395@port70.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 11:21:50 +0100
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use .object_arch to declare the architecture of
the object file
* Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2017-02-05 18:40:47 -0500]:
> On Sat, Feb 04, 2017 at 03:19:47PM +0100, Reiner Herrmann wrote:
> > musl fails to build for arm with current binutils (since commit bada434).
> > Szabolcs Nagy suggested to use .object_arch for declaring the architecture
> > of the object file, instead of .arch.
> >
> > See also: https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2006-09/msg00054.html
> > ---
> > src/thread/arm/atomics.s | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/thread/arm/atomics.s b/src/thread/arm/atomics.s
> > index 202faa4a..101ad391 100644
> > --- a/src/thread/arm/atomics.s
> > +++ b/src/thread/arm/atomics.s
> > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ __a_gettp_cp15:
> > bx lr
> >
> > /* Tag this file with minimum ISA level so as not to affect linking. */
> > -.arch armv4t
> > +.object_arch armv4t
> > .eabi_attribute 6,2
>
> What's the earliest version of binutils that supports this? If it's a
> newish feature we can't just unconditionally switch... (ARM is
> infamous for that kind of breakage...) But if it's been around for a
> really long time (long enough that older binutils versions are
> seriously broken) it doesn't matter.
binutils supports it since
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=7a1d4c38938b172a8f3fdb38b01551306bd51d8d
and it is present in the last gplv2 binutils source
llvm seems to support it too since
https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/commit/09f38a0ef13bf542f7b3f1862d718e33e7de587b
i think it's in llvm >=3.5
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
