Hi,
On 13 April 2015 at 14:38, Pavel Machek <pa...@denx.de> wrote:
>
> On Mon 2015-04-13 08:52:52, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 02:49:28PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > > Add an error in known-bad case so that we don't produce broken and
> > > hard to debug binaries.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pa...@denx.de>
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/u-boot.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/u-boot.h
> > > index 43cc494..ae4c21b 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/u-boot.h
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/u-boot.h
> > > @@ -49,4 +49,8 @@ typedef struct bd_info {
> > > #define IH_ARCH_DEFAULT IH_ARCH_ARM64
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > +#if defined(CONFIG_USE_PRIVATE_LIBGCC) && defined(CONFIG_SYS_THUMB_BUILD)
> > > +#error Thumb build does not work with private libgcc.
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > > #endif /* _U_BOOT_H_ */
> >
> > I'm agreeable to taking this for the release if you'll go and debug
> > what's wrong with our private libgcc code for the next release.
>
> If you are willing to ship u-boot with known and nasty to debug
> problem, it is your choice.
>
> Either the patch is good or it is bad, my future plans should have
> nothing to do with it. Notice that this patch does not help _me_ in
> any way, as I know about the issue and am unlikely to hit it again,
> and that original problem still breaks the build on my system.
>
> Help from someone knowing ARM assembly would be nice. Now that we know
> what the problem is, it should not be too bad.
I hit this also and I think it has to do with missing ENTRY/ENDPROC
macros. I sent a patch.
Pavel, your email seemed to me as a little sharp for the mailing list.
>
> Best regards,
> Pavel
Regards,
Simon
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
