> > > So is there a way to ask gcc "What the hell are your defaults right
> > > now?".
> >
> > I don't consider that a well formed question[1]. You should be asking
> > what the compiler is *doing* right now. The answer is in a preprocessor
> > macro.
>
> How about "What is the default target o
On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 12:26:05AM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> Obviously if your code assumes [say] a Cortex-A8 and uses NEON assembly
> without checking first than all bets are off. There are two ways of
> resolving
> this:
> - Don't do that.
> - Hack the makefile to always build with NEON enab
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 10:06:55PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > Right. That's almost certainly a bug. My guess would be cargo-cult
> > copying or an old hack to workaround borkenness elsewhere.
>
> OK, so simply removing the explicit CFLAGS settings in the Makefile,
> should make the package w
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 10:06:55PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> Right. That's almost certainly a bug. My guess would be cargo-cult copying
> or an old hack to workaround borkenness elsewhere.
OK, so simply removing the explicit CFLAGS settings in the Makefile,
should make the package work correct
> On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 03:10:50AM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > Your understanding is incorrect. Thumb interworking is always enabled
> > when generating armv5 or later code, plus it is enabled by default for
> > all EABI based targets. Both of which are true for armhf.
>
> Well in that case,
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 03:10:50AM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> Your understanding is incorrect. Thumb interworking is always enabled when
> generating armv5 or later code, plus it is enabled by default for all EABI
> based targets. Both of which are true for armhf.
Well in that case, there was
> My understanding of the gcc defaults on armhf is that thumb-interworking
> is not enabled by default.
Your understanding is incorrect. Thumb interworking is always enabled when
generating armv5 or later code, plus it is enabled by default for all EABI
based targets. Both of which are true fo
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 01:40:42PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> Like I said, the -mthumb-interwork option isn't meaningful in this context.
> Don't beleieve everything you misread and misunderstand. All all EABI based
> targets, and all armv5+ code have interworking enabled by default (in the
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 01:49:49PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > Interworking is a madatory of the ARM EABI. As mentioned above,
> > interworking is basically free on armv5 and later architectures. It
> > should never be disabled.
>
> Wel the gcc in armhf has it off by default, and the descript
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 01:49:49PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> Interworking is a madatory of the ARM EABI. As mentioned above, interworking
> is basically free on armv5 and later architectures. It should never be
> disabled.
Wel the gcc in armhf has it off by default, and the description says
i
> > Is that true? For ARMv7, interworking is essentially free and Thumb code
> > would likely be faster due to its smaller memory footprint. So I would
> > have thought that not only should Thumb code be catered for, but
> > actively encouraged. Or am I missing something?
>
> We only use thumb2 in
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 07:23:18AM +0100, Tixy wrote:
> Is that true? For ARMv7, interworking is essentially free and Thumb code
> would likely be faster due to its smaller memory footprint. So I would
> have thought that not only should Thumb code be catered for, but
> actively encouraged. Or am I
On 31 August 2011 10:55, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 07:23:18AM +0100, Tixy wrote:
>>On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 23:34 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>>> My changes were to remove -mfpu=softfp and -mthumb-interworking, since
>>> as far as I can tell armhf uses -mfpu=hardfp and -mno-t
On 31 August 2011 11:56, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> -mfloat-abi=hard -mfpu=vfpv3 -mthumb -march=armv7-a
That should actually be -mfpu=vfpv3-d16 to be more precise.
Konstantinos
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Cont
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 07:23:18AM +0100, Tixy wrote:
>On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 23:34 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>> My changes were to remove -mfpu=softfp and -mthumb-interworking, since
>> as far as I can tell armhf uses -mfpu=hardfp and -mno-thumbinterworking
>> by default.
>
>Is that true? For
On Tue, 2011-08-30 at 23:34 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> My changes were to remove -mfpu=softfp and -mthumb-interworking, since
> as far as I can tell armhf uses -mfpu=hardfp and -mno-thumbinterworking
> by default.
Is that true? For ARMv7, interworking is essentially free and Thumb code
would
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:53:27PM +, Hector Oron wrote:
> Hello,
>
> >> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Lennart Sorensen
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Any suggestions for what to fix next?
>
> 'xf86-video-msm' might allow some fun too..
I made an attempt.
http://tinyplanet.ca/~lsore
17 matches
Mail list logo
