Dear Stefan, Stefan Roese wrote: > On Monday 22 June 2009 20:10:23 Dirk Behme wrote: >>> This is because it's a copy from the Linux code. Not sure if >>> we should change the coding style here. I really prefer to be >>> in sync with the Linux version. This makes future updates easier. >> You have to discuss this with Wolfgang, but he wasn't happy about it. >> Enjoy the time while he is on vacation ;) > > Yes, will do. ;) > >>>>>> 3. The major one: By the new 64bit variables, depending on tool chain, >>>>>> there are now calls to libgcc introduced. Depending on tool chain, >>>>>> this might work, or fail. As it does with one of my tool chains, which >>>>>> worked totally fine until here. It was my understanding that U-Boot >>>>>> shall not rely on libgcc, i.e. proper tool chain libraries. >>>>>> >>>>>> Having CONFIG_SYS_64BIT_VSPRINTF not defined, the linker needs >>>>>> "_lshrdi3", which comes from nand_base.o and nand_bbt.o. E.g. from >>>>>> "len = mtd->size >> (this->bbt_erase_shift + 2);" from nand_bbt.c. >>>>>> >>>>>> Having CONFIG_SYS_64BIT_VSPRINTF enabled, the linker requests >>>>>> _lshrdi3, _udivdi3, _umoddi3 and _clz from libgcc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking into U-Boot's lib_arm/ directory, we have already some low >>>>>> level math functions there to avoid libgcc. E.g. nand_bbt.c has >>>>>> references to _ashrdi3, too, but this is resolved by lib_arm's version >>>>>> what is fine. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd like that NAND code is modified that only math is used which >>>>>> U-Boot provides and no libgcc is needed. >>>>> this is a already known problem by Stefan and I and solved >>>>> >>>>> two patchs was send to the ML >>>> Thanks for the hint! Do you kindly have the subjects or better links >>>> to mailing list archive? >>> http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-arm.git;a=commit;h=cf96e690cb9840b4a5 >>> dc7e750be863228550b5ce >>> >>> and >>> >>> http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-arm.git;a=commit;h=c5ae538c9bd359c137 >>> d306e431b2589ba91fbc08 >>> >>> both available in the "testing" branch of u-boot-arm. >> Yes, I found them. I was confused because I understood Jean-Christophe >> that they were posted to the list already in the past, and not while >> we were discussing about it ;) > > Jean-Christophe did post those patches a few days ago. > >>> From you comments on the list I see that you found those patches here >>> too. :) >>> >>> Do these patches fix the building problem for you? >> "testing" branch of u-boot-arm compiled fine for me, but I'm not sure >> if the NAND changes are in "testing" branch of u-boot-arm, too. > > I'm pretty sure they are, since Jean-Christophe used these patches exactly to > fix this NAND related problem on ARM. But it should be easy to check if the > patches are in here. git is your friend... ;) > >> Anyway, I would vote for moving these two commits as soon as possible >> into mainline to fix mainline, too. But there was some discussion >> about how to deal with Makefile changes to the patches Jean-Christophe >> sent to the list. >> >> Maybe we can find a solution for the Makefile issues of these patches >> discussed on this list and then move the fixes asap into mainline? > > Yes, I would really like to see those changes in mainline soon as well. I > have > to admit that I'm not a real Makefile "expert", so I don't have a real > expertise to get involved in this discussion. But I'll try to take another > look at this thread tomorrow.
Sorry, I know, the first week after vacation is always quite busy ;) But any news on this? Many thanks Dirk _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
