https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19145
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery dot com> ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #4)
> There are 2 issues:
>
> 1. arm-none-eabi binutils only supports litte-endian.
> 2. arm-none-eabi GCC only supports little-endian.
>
> To support big-endian, you should configure binutils and GCC for
> armeb-none-eabi. Or you fix ARM EABI binutils and GCC to support
> both little-endian and big-endian.
I'm not convinced that's actually true. We've shipped working
arm-none-eabi-{gcc,binutils} toolchains with both the `be;@mbig-endian`
multilib and the `.;` (little-endian) multilib (among others) before.
>From the gcc testsuite results, it very much looks like the only difference in
failures between the little-endian multilib and the big-endian one is that any
testcase that uses -flto fails for the big-endian multilib.
This is definitely a regression.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
