This is the mail archive of the
libffi-discuss@sourceware.org
mailing list for the libffi project.
Re: [crossdev] [BUG] libffi-3.0.8 doesn't compile on MX31
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl at pengutronix dot de>
- Cc: Robert Schwebel <r dot schwebel at pengutronix dot de>, libffi-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com, crossdev at send-patches dot org
- Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 20:26:38 +0100
- Subject: Re: [crossdev] [BUG] libffi-3.0.8 doesn't compile on MX31
- References: <20090524191738.GB6805@pengutronix.de> <4A1AB7D2.7090103@pengutronix.de>
Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> Robert Schwebel wrote:
>> [Please Cc: me on reply, I'm not subscribed to the libffi list]
>>
>> I'm trying to build libffi for ARM, especially for ARM1131EJ-S
>> (Freescale MX31):
>>
>> arm-1136jfs-linux-gnueabi-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I./include -Iinclude -I./src -isystem /home/rsc/svn/oselas/bsp/pengutronix/OSELAS.BSP-Pengutronix-AllYes-trunk/platform-phyCORE-i.MX31/sysroot-target/include -isystem /home/rsc/svn/oselas/bsp/pengutronix/OSELAS.BSP-Pengutronix-AllYes-trunk/platform-phyCORE-i.MX31/sysroot-target/usr/include -I. -I./include -Iinclude -I./src -g -O2 -MT src/arm/sysv.lo -MD -MP -MF src/arm/.deps/sysv.Tpo -c src/arm/sysv.S -fPIC -DPIC -o src/arm/.libs/sysv.o
>> src/arm/sysv.S: Assembler messages:
>> src/arm/sysv.S:203: Error: selected processor does not support `stfeqs f0,[r2]'
>> src/arm/sysv.S:208: Error: selected processor does not support `stfeqd f0,[r2]'
>> src/arm/sysv.S:283: Error: selected processor does not support `ldfs f0,[sp]'
>> src/arm/sysv.S:286: Error: selected processor does not support `ldfd f0,[sp]'
>> src/arm/sysv.S:289: Error: selected processor does not support `ldfd f0,[sp]'
>>
>> Does anyone have an idea what goes wrong here?
>
> I've filled out a bug report along with some analysis:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40242
>
> as it breaks (cross)compiling gcc with certain options enabled.
To be honest, you're probably the only person who is going to fix this, at
least in the short term. It's pretty clear that you're going to have to
distinguish between these cases on the basis of configure options rather
than compiler #defines.
Andrew.