On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:36:34PM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:

On 6/21/2016 2:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

quoted

I had to s/__atomic_fetch/__atomic32_fetch/ to avoid a namespace clash
with the builtin C11 atomic primitives.

You want me to rename them all to regain consistent naming?

Yes, it's probably the right thing to do.  All the internal routines with "atomic32"
or "atomic64" I assume you mean?

Yep, after this patch we have a few __atomic_ and a few __atomic32_,
which is rather unbecoming. Lemme go convert them all to __atomic32_.

So what's your build process for the cross tools, by the way?  I'm assuming
you're not doing a total bootstrap cross-tool build since you'd need minimal
kernel headers (linux/errno.h or whatever) in that case.  I assume you're using
the host headers to build the cross tool?

So I'm a little confused how the other kernel headers are working out for you,
e.g. <arch/icache.h> is referenced when building the tilegx libgcc.

I've no idea; I use this thing:

  git://git.infradead.org/users/segher/buildall.git

Although I've got some local modifications, none are to the actual
toolchain building part (although I suppose I should send segher a
patch).

I have binutils-gdb.git and gcc.bit checkouts and point the buildall
config to that (both are on latest stable branches binutils-2_26-branch
and gcc-6-branch resp.). And I point the kernel path to my current
hacked up tree.

I don't really rebuild the entire toolchains often, mostly only when I
really need a new GCC or its getting really old (like I used 5.3.0 for a
long while).