Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Apr 2003 17:01:14 +0200 (MEST) | From | mikpe@csd ... | Subject | Re: gcc-2.95 broken on PPC? |
| |
On 10 Apr 2003 16:20:55 +0200, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2003-04-10 at 14:56, mikpe@csd.uu.se wrote: > > > However, bugs #1 (zlib.c) and #3 (div64.h) disappear if I compile > > my kernels with gcc-3.2.2 instead of 2.95.4, which is a strong > > indication that 2.95.4 is broken on PPC. Is this something that's > > well-known to PPC people? > > > > The patches are included below for reference. > > It would be interesting to see the section dumps of the resulting > coff image and compare the version that works and the one that > doesn't. I still suspect some alignement crap, seeing this may > eventually show it.
That's certainly possible. I was rebuilding 2.4.21-pre7 with both compilers, and suddenly the gcc-2.95.4-built vmlinux.coff succeeded to boot. I didn't expect that, since I've been fighting these boot problems for weeks now.
I managed to reproduce the problem with 2.4.20 vanilla + only the one patch to ld.script to fix the CLAIM error on "loading .data": the kernel compiled with gcc-3.2.2 boots, the one compiled with gcc-2.95.4 fails at the "clearing .bss" step. The images, vmlinux and vmlinux.coff for both compiler versions, and .config are in <http://www.csd.uu.se/~mikpe/linux/powerpc/> in case anyone wants to check what's wrong with the 2.95.4 build.
/Mikael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |