Re: [PATCH] fix missing option in binutils version check
From: Tom Rini <hidden>
Date: 2004-07-05 18:18:31
On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 12:29:18AM +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, Tom Rini wrote:quoted
And yes, passing -many does work on all older supported versions of binutils. So perhaps we should just add -Wa,-many to our cflags and be done with it now (and for future fixes of this sort).gcc 3.2 passes only -mppc, so all altive instructions will fail to compile without either -many or -maltivec
Yes, this is a _binutils_ problem however, as older binutils (2.14.* and lower that we would allow anyhow) are fine.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff -purNX /suse/olh/kernel/kernel_exclude.txt linux-2.6.7-bk16.orig/arch/ppc/Makefile linux-2.6.7-bk16/arch/ppc/Makefile--- linux-2.6.7-bk16.orig/arch/ppc/Makefile 2004-07-03 22:33:35.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6.7-bk16/arch/ppc/Makefile 2004-07-03 23:11:10.037787069 +0200@@ -24,6 +24,9 @@ ifndef CONFIG_E500 cflags-y += -mstring endif +# gcc 3.2.3 passes -mppc, +# the altivec asm code will fail to compile with binutils newer than 2.15 +cflags-$(CONFIG_6xx) += -Wa,-many
No. We _always_ want to pass in -Wa,-many to future-proof ourself from this being a problem again.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
--- linux-2.6.7-bk16.orig/arch/ppc/kernel/Makefile 2004-07-03 22:33:35.000000000 +0200 +++ linux-2.6.7-bk16/arch/ppc/kernel/Makefile 2004-07-03 22:51:16.802332774 +0200@@ -8,6 +8,9 @@ endif ifdef CONFIG_4xx EXTRA_AFLAGS := -Wa,-m405 endif +ifdef CONFIG_6xx +EXTRA_AFLAGS := -Wa,-maltivec +endif
And this should become redundant. -- Tom Rini http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/