[PATCH] netbsd EABI support

[Ramana Radhakrishnan]

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 3:12 PM Richard Earnshaw (lists)
<Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com> 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.
>

I'm not sure if this has been asked. Do you and the other authors have
a copyright assignment on file with the FSF ? I don't see any one with
the email coypu@sdf.org on the copyright file . I think this has been
asked in terms of the vax netbsd patches.

regards
Ramana


> R.
>