On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 1:49 AM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > Thanks for submitting the patch. This patch is OK to merge to the > master and all open branches that have this target.
> A corresponding patch for the RTEMS Source Builder is necessary > because a gcc release with this patch won't be available for a while. Yep, I figured it'd be the same style as we have for some of the other patches that refer directly to the gcc.git commit: https://git.rtems.org/rtems-source-builder/tree/rtems/config/tools/rtems-gcc-7.2.0-newlib-2.5.0.20170922-1.cfg#n24 1. Is that right? Or would we rather commit the patch into rtems-source-builder and use "--rsb-file"? I imagine it doesn't really make a difference, so I'll just go with the former if you don't have a preference. 2. Would only the "rtems-gcc-7.3.0-newlib-3.0.0.cfg" file need the patch (since it seems to be what the rtems-source-builder uses for the "5/rtems-x86_64" buildset[1][2]), or would there be more? (I don't see the need to support older versions since the port won't exist for a while, so the tools don't need to be updated backwards either.) [1] https://git.rtems.org/rtems-source-builder/tree/rtems/config/5/rtems-x86_64.bset#n4 [2] https://git.rtems.org/rtems-source-builder/tree/rtems/config/5/rtems-default.bset#n14 > I am starting a build with this now. If Sebastian pushes it before me, > that's OK. > --joel > On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Amaan Cheval <amaan.che...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi! >> All the gcc targets for RTEMS include gcc/config/rtems.h in tm_file to add >> specific linker options using LIB_SPEC. >> This patch simply intends to add the same to the x86_64 target. >> There are no tests in this patch because I don't see any tests for any of the >> other RTEMS targets - let me know if you'd be interested in a patch for that, >> and I can look into adding general tests for all the RTEMS targets or just >> specific ones that _must_ support these switches - Joel and Sebastian may be >> able to shed light on which it should be, if any. >> P.S. - I've also added this patch to rtems-source-builder and built gcc to >> verify that it works (in that the new switches do not throw "unrecognized >> command line option" errors anymore, at least). Let me know if you'd like a >> patch to test with rtems-source-builder, if that makes it easier for you to >> verify. >> Thanks! >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> 2018-04-07 Amaan Cheval <amaan.che...@gmail.com> >> * config.gcc (x86_64-*-rtems*): Add rtems.h to tm_file for >> custom LIB_SPEC setup. >> Index: gcc/config.gcc >> =================================================================== >> --- gcc/config.gcc (revision 259188) >> +++ gcc/config.gcc (working copy) >> @@ -1496,7 +1496,7 @@ x86_64-*-elf*) >> tm_file="${tm_file} i386/unix.h i386/att.h dbxelf.h elfos.h newlib-stdint.h i386/i386elf.h i386/x86-64.h" >> ;; >> x86_64-*-rtems*) >> - tm_file="${tm_file} i386/unix.h i386/att.h dbxelf.h elfos.h newlib-stdint.h i386/i386elf.h i386/x86-64.h i386/rtemself.h" >> + tm_file="${tm_file} i386/unix.h i386/att.h dbxelf.h elfos.h newlib-stdint.h i386/i386elf.h i386/x86-64.h i386/rtemself.h rtems.h" >> ;; >> i[34567]86-*-rdos*) >> tm_file="${tm_file} i386/unix.h i386/att.h dbxelf.h elfos.h newlib-stdint.h i386/i386elf.h i386/rdos.h"
