LOGIN   :::   RECOVER PASS   :::   GET ACCOUNT    
Browse
  • Projects
  • Code (CVS)
  • Forums
  • News
  • Articles
  • Polls
  •  
    OpenCores
  • FAQ
  • CVS HowTo
  • Mission
  • Media
  • Tools
  • Advertise
  • Mirrors
  • Logos
  • Contact us
  • Find Resources
  • Job Opportunity
  •  
    Tools
  • Search
      
  • Download Cores (CVSGet)
  •  
    More
  • Wishbone
  • Perlilog
  • EDA tools
  • OpenTech CD
  •  
    Navigation: All forums > Openrisc > Message List > Message Post

    Message

    Reply | Reply all
    Date Prev | Date Next | Thread Prev | Thread Next Date Index | Thread Index

    From: Scott Furman <sfurman@r...>
    Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:07:20 -0800
    Subject: Re: [openrisc] gdb stub instead of JTAG?
    Top

    Title:
    Matjaz Breskvar wrote:
    mid20031111143720.GK27498@v...">
    * Robert Cragie (rcc@j...) wrote:
      
    I had problems with diag_printf() with optimisations turned on but works OK
    with optimisation turned off. I am not using multi-tasking facilities of
    eCos yet.
    
    Has anyone else experienced problems using optimisation (-02) with the
    compiler?
        
    
    Yes, there were reports of problems compiling eCos with -O2 optimizations
    on opencores gcc-3.2.3 compiler. i think going to -O solved it. (it in the
    archives a few months ago)
    I encountered bugs with both long long and (soft) double floating point support using gcc 3.1 and have made some fixes to the compiler to solve these problems.  I haven't submitted my patches because my changes modify the ABI, rendering object files incompatible with code compiled by the unmodified compiler.  (The calling convention I use is more efficient than the existing 3.1 version: 64-bit values (long longs and doubles) are passed by value in registers rather than as references.) 

    Is anyone actively maintaining the gcc versions ?  I could share my changes if we were willing to tolerate an ABI change.
    mid20031111143720.GK27498@v...">
    	- linker may miscalculate section lenght or corrupt the binary
    when linking with -z. If you avoid giving section directives
    to gcc it should be ok.
    I have a bunch of linker fixes which cure the problems with linking with the -r flag.  I don't think they would fix problems of the sort you describe, but it's worth a try.  I'll submit my patches tomorrow.

    -Scott

    ReferenceAuthor
    RE: [openrisc] gdb stub instead of JTAG?Heiko Panther
    RE: [openrisc] gdb stub instead of JTAG?Robert Cragie
    Re: [openrisc] gdb stub instead of JTAG?Matjaz Breskvar

    Follow upAuthor
    [openrisc] gcc 'long long'Matjaz Breskvar
    Re: [openrisc] gdb stub instead of JTAG?Scott Furman
    Re: [openrisc] gdb stub instead of JTAG?Matjaz Breskvar

     
    Copyright (c) 1999 OPENCORES.ORG. All rights reserved.