This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Fix arm-eabi attributes
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
- To: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: binutils <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 09:42:37 +0100
- Subject: Re: Fix arm-eabi attributes
- References: <49F9B481.1070902@codesourcery.com> <1241108636.19288.21.camel@pc960.cambridge.arm.com> <49FAA013.1040905@codesourcery.com>
On Fri, 2009-05-01 at 08:09 +0100, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 15:24 +0100, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> >> This patch fixes a latent problem with arm eabi attributes. We triggered off
> >> TE_LINUX when defaulting the FPU, thus leading to a lack of default for plain
> >> arm-eabi, leading to incorrect object files.
> >>
> >
> >> ! #if !(defined (TE_LINUX) || defined (TE_NetBSD) || defined (TE_VXWORKS))
> >> /* Some environments specify a default FPU. If they don't, infer it
> >> from the processor. */
> >> if (mcpu_fpu_opt)
> >> --- 20267,20273 ----
> >> }
> >> else if (!mfpu_opt)
> >> {
> >> ! #if !(defined (EABI_DEFAULT) || defined (TE_NetBSD) || defined (TE_VXWORKS))
> >
> > I'm not sure that's right for legacy linux (which defaults to FPA);
> > shouldn't you just add EABI_DEFAULT to the list rather than replace
> > TE_LINUX with it?
>
> I don't know. I thought this was what we'd agreed on though :)
Leaving TE_LINUX in the list won't affect EABI targets, but will prevent
a regression on legacy linux boards (note that the list is wrapped with
'!').
R.
--
Richard Earnshaw Email: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com
Engineering Manager Phone: +44 1223 400569 (Direct + VoiceMail)
OpenSource Tools Switchboard: +44 1223 400400
ARM Ltd Fax: +44 1223 400410
110 Fulbourn Rd Web: http://www.arm.com/
Cambridge, UK. CB1 9NJ