On Dec 21, 2017 1:16 AM, "Chris Johns" <chr...@rtems.org> wrote:
On 21/12/17 6:13 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 12/12/17 02:54, Joel Sherrill wrote: >> Many of the PowerPC BSPs uses a shared linker script. That's good. >> Unfortunately, there is variation in the start symbol and the use of a "-u" >> (e.g. undefined) symbol in the bsp_specs. I had initially thought I would add >> the start symbol and any use of -u to the linkcmds (EXTERN). But now I am >> thinking that due to use of shared linker scripts and inconsistencies, some >> BSPs are better off if I add command line arguments to the linking stage. >> >> Also some use motld_start.o as the start file which is in conflict with other >> BSPs using the same linker script. >> >> This is the fragment in bsp_specs I am trying to eliminate or standardize: >> >> -e __rtems_entry_point -u __vectors motld_start.o%s >> >> Thoughts? > > Why don't we use _start for all entry points and start.o for all start files? > +1 I'm not opposed to this but it requires even more delicate editing that I can't easily test. We can get rid of bsp_specs and do this largely at the same time. The specifications in GCC will have to be tinkered with to address what's left in bsp_specs so the specs can do this. But I haven't figured out precisely what to do with gcc at this point. Chris
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
