[PATCH] netbsd EABI support

[Richard Earnshaw (lists)]

On 23/05/2019 15:11, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> On 23/05/2019 15:03, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> On 20/05/2019 20:24, Jeff Law wrote:
>>> On 4/9/19 10:36 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>>>> On 09/04/2019 16:04, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>>> On 4/8/19 9:17 AM, coypu@sdf.org wrote:
>>>>>> Pinging again in the hope of getting the patch in, I'd like to have
>>>>>> less outstanding patches :) (I have quite a few and new releases
>>>>>> can become painful!)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> gcc/ChangeLog
>>>>>>
>>>>>> config.gcc (arm*-*-netbsdelf*) Add support for EABI configuration
>>>>>> config.host (arm*-*-netbsd*): Build driver-arm.o
>>>>>> config/arm/netbsd-eabi.h: New file.
>>>>>> config/arm/netbsd-elf.h
>>>>>> config/netbsd-elf.h: Define SUBTARGET_EXTRA_SPECS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> libgcc/ChangeLog
>>>>>>
>>>>>> config.host (arm*-*-netbsdelf*): Add support for EABI configuration
>>>>>> config/arm/t-netbsd: LIB1ASMFUNCS: Append to existing set.
>>>>>> 		     HOST_LIBGCC2_CFLAGS: workaround possible bug
>>>>>> config/arm/t-netbsd-eabi: New file.
>>>>> So we're well into stage4 which means technically it's too late for
>>>>> something like this.  However, given it's limited scope I won't object
>>>>> if the ARM port maintainers want to go forward.  Otherwise I'll queue it
>>>>> for gcc-10.
>>>>>
>>>>> jeff
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was about to approve this (modulo removing the now obsolete
>>>> FPU_DEFAULT macro), until I noticed that it also modifies the generic
>>>> NetBSD code as well.  I'm certainly not willing to approve that myself
>>>> at this late stage, but if one of the NetBSD OS maintainers wants to
>>>> step up and do so, I'll happily take the Arm back-end code as that's not
>>>> a primary or secondary target.
>>> So is removal of the FPUTYPE_DEFAULT stuff all that's needed for this to
>>> go forward now that Jason T has chimed in?
>>>
>>> jeff
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Very close.  I was just doing a last pass through the patch to make that
>> small edit when I noticed this in config/arm/netbsd-eabi.h:
>>
>>
>> #define SUBTARGET_EXTRA_ASM_SPEC		\
>>   "-matpcs ..."
>>
>> Why is the assembler unconditionally passed -matpcs for an eabi
>> configuration?  That sounds broken.
>>
>> R.
>>
> 
> 
> Looking at what GAS does with this flag, it simply causes the assembler
> to create an empty .arm.atpcs debug section.  On that basis, I would
> expect that it's then safe (and correct) to remove this: the EABI is not
> the ATPCS.
> 
> R.
> 


Finally, I need the names of the authors and their email addresses in a
format suitable for the ChangeLog file.  As far as I can tell, that means:

Yourself
Matt Thomas
Matthew Green
Nick Hudson

R.