[ARM/FDPIC v5 02/21] [ARM] FDPIC: Handle arm*-*-uclinuxfdpiceabi in configure scripts
Christophe Lyon
christophe.lyon@st.com
Thu Aug 29 14:54:00 GMT 2019
On 12/07/2019 08:49, Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@st.com> writes:
>> The new arm-uclinuxfdpiceabi target behaves pretty much like
>> arm-linux-gnueabi. In order the enable the same set of features, we
>> have to update several configure scripts that generally match targets
>> like *-*-linux*: in most places, we add *-uclinux* where there is
>> already *-linux*, or uclinux* when there is already linux*.
>>
>> In gcc/config.gcc and libgcc/config.host we use *-*-uclinuxfdpiceabi
>> because there is already a different behaviour for *-*uclinux* target.
>>
>> In libtool.m4, we use uclinuxfdpiceabi in cases where ELF shared
>> libraries support is required, as uclinux does not guarantee that.
>>
>> 2019-XX-XX Christophe Lyon <christophe.lyon@st.com>
>>
>> config/
>> * futex.m4: Handle *-uclinux*.
>> * tls.m4 (GCC_CHECK_TLS): Likewise.
>>
>> gcc/
>> * config.gcc: Handle *-*-uclinuxfdpiceabi.
>>
>> libatomic/
>> * configure.tgt: Handle arm*-*-uclinux*.
>> * configure: Regenerate.
>>
>> libgcc/
>> * config.host: Handle *-*-uclinuxfdpiceabi.
>>
>> libitm/
>> * configure.tgt: Handle *-*-uclinux*.
>> * configure: Regenerate.
>>
>> libstdc++-v3/
>> * acinclude.m4: Handle uclinux*.
>> * configure: Regenerate.
>> * configure.host: Handle uclinux*
>>
>> * libtool.m4: Handle uclinux*.
>
> Has the libtool.m4 patch been submitted to upstream libtool?
> I think this is supposed to be handled by submitting there first
> and then cherry-picking into gcc, so that the change isn't lost
> by a future import.
>
I added a comment to libtool.m4 about this.
>> [...]
>>
>> diff --git a/config/tls.m4 b/config/tls.m4
>> index 1a5fc59..a487aa4 100644
>> --- a/config/tls.m4
>> +++ b/config/tls.m4
>> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([GCC_CHECK_TLS], [
>> dnl Shared library options may depend on the host; this check
>> dnl is only known to be needed for GNU/Linux.
>> case $host in
>> - *-*-linux*)
>> + *-*-linux* | -*-uclinux*)
>> LDFLAGS="-shared -Wl,--no-undefined $LDFLAGS"
>> ;;
>> esac
>
> Is this right for all uclinux targets?
I don't think so, now restricted to -*-uclinuxfdpic*
>
>> diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4 b/libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4
>> index 84258d8..cb0fdc5 100644
>> --- a/libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4
>> +++ b/libstdc++-v3/acinclude.m4
>
> It'd probably be worth splitting out the libstdc++-v3 bits and
> submitting them separately, cc:ing libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org. But...
I've now split the patch into two parts (both attached here)
>
>> @@ -1404,7 +1404,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_LIBSTDCXX_TIME], [
>> ac_has_nanosleep=yes
>> ac_has_sched_yield=yes
>> ;;
>> - gnu* | linux* | kfreebsd*-gnu | knetbsd*-gnu)
>> + gnu* | linux* | kfreebsd*-gnu | knetbsd*-gnu | uclinux*)
>> AC_MSG_CHECKING([for at least GNU libc 2.17])
>> AC_TRY_COMPILE(
>> [#include <features.h>],
>
> is this the right thing to do? It seems odd to be testing the glibc
> version for uclibc.
>
> Do you want to support multiple possible settings of
> ac_has_clock_monotonic and ac_has_clock_realtime? Or could you just
> hard-code the values, given particular baseline assumptions about the
> version of uclibc etc.? Hard-coding would then make....
>
>> @@ -1526,7 +1526,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_LIBSTDCXX_TIME], [
>>
>> if test x"$ac_has_clock_monotonic" != x"yes"; then
>> case ${target_os} in
>> - linux*)
>> + linux* | uclinux*)
>> AC_MSG_CHECKING([for clock_gettime syscall])
>> AC_TRY_COMPILE(
>> [#include <unistd.h>
>
> ...this redundant.
>
Right, now fixed.
>> @@ -2415,7 +2415,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_CLOCALE], [
>> # Default to "generic".
>> if test $enable_clocale_flag = auto; then
>> case ${target_os} in
>> - linux* | gnu* | kfreebsd*-gnu | knetbsd*-gnu)
>> + linux* | gnu* | kfreebsd*-gnu | knetbsd*-gnu | uclinux*)
>> enable_clocale_flag=gnu
>> ;;
>> darwin*)
>
> This too seems to be choosing a glibc setting for a uclibc target.
Indeed.
>
>> @@ -2661,7 +2661,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_ALLOCATOR], [
>> # Default to "new".
>> if test $enable_libstdcxx_allocator_flag = auto; then
>> case ${target_os} in
>> - linux* | gnu* | kfreebsd*-gnu | knetbsd*-gnu)
>> + linux* | gnu* | kfreebsd*-gnu | knetbsd*-gnu | uclinux*)
>> enable_libstdcxx_allocator_flag=new
>> ;;
>> *)
>
> The full case is:
>
> # Probe for host-specific support if no specific model is specified.
> # Default to "new".
> if test $enable_libstdcxx_allocator_flag = auto; then
> case ${target_os} in
> linux* | gnu* | kfreebsd*-gnu | knetbsd*-gnu)
> enable_libstdcxx_allocator_flag=new
> ;;
> *)
> enable_libstdcxx_allocator_flag=new
> ;;
> esac
> fi
>
> which looks a bit redundant :-)
Right :-)
Thanks,
Christophe
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
> .
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0002-ARM-FDPIC-Handle-arm-uclinuxfdpiceabi-in-configure-s.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 12760 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/attachments/20190829/dcf645ce/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0024-ARM-FDPIC-Handle-arm-uclinuxfdpiceabi-in-libstdc-con.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 8710 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/attachments/20190829/dcf645ce/attachment-0001.bin>
More information about the Libstdc++
mailing list