On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 02:45:59PM +0200, Romain Naour wrote: > Hi Stafford, > > Le 23/08/2019 à 23:01, Stafford Horne a écrit : > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 05:23:12PM +0200, Romain Naour wrote: > >> Hi Stafford, > >> > >> Le 23/08/2019 à 15:47, Stafford Horne a écrit : > >>> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 07:35:33PM +0200, Romain Naour wrote: > >>>> Hi Waldemar, > >>>> > >>>> I discovered an issue with uClibc and binutils 2.32 and gcc 9.1 or 9.2. > >>> > >>> Hi Romain, > >>> > >>> Thank you for reporting and doing the initial investigation. Sorry, I > >>> haven't > >>> built uclibc-ng for a while. > >> > >> You're welcome, your help is very appreciated. > >>> > >>> Have you been able to make much progress? > >> > >> Yes and no... > > > > I was able to reproduce the issue and did a temporary fix by just deleting > > the > > __syscall_error from or1k_clone.S (2 places). This fixed the build but > > probably > > not something we really want to do. But it does point out that the only bad > > symbol is the one in or1k_clone.S. > > I don't get it, there is only SYSCALL_ERROR_NAME from or1k_clone.S. > Maybe post the patch diff here.
Sorry I meant SYSCALL_ERROR_NAME which defined __syscall_error. It actually defines it incorrectly as it looks for a definition of PIC, but in uclibc-ng __PIC__ is defined. > > > > There is a glibc port I am working on getting working right now: > > > > > > https://github.com/stffrdhrn/or1k-glibc/blob/upstream-rebase/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/or1k/or1k_clone.S > > > > It seems to have the same code. But it does not have this problem. The > > macro > > for SYSCALL_ERROR_NAME is probably getting evaluated differently in glibc vs > > uclibc-ng. > > Maybe something doesn't work with the way we define SYSCALL_ERROR_NAME > https://cgit.uclibc-ng.org/cgi/cgit/uclibc-ng.git/tree/libc/sysdeps/linux/or1k/sysdep.h#n67 > > > > This fix should not be too hard. SYSCALL_ERROR_NAME is only being used on > > or1k_clone.S. Let's try to see what is the right thing to replace it with > > for > > uclibc-ng. > > I haven't looked in depth in the code, I'm not sure how to fix this :-/ > No problems, I just posted a patch which I think fixes this can you give it a try? https://mailman.uclibc-ng.org/pipermail/devel/2019-August/001892.html -Stafford _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@uclibc-ng.org https://mailman.uclibc-ng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
