This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [RFC PATCH] ld/ARM: Increase maximum page size to 64kB
- From: Will Newton <will dot newton at linaro dot org>
- To: Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo dot tkachov at arm dot com>
- Cc: "nickc at redhat dot com" <nickc at redhat dot com>, "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:00:17 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ld/ARM: Increase maximum page size to 64kB
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1403795923-24306-1-git-send-email-will dot newton at linaro dot org> <53B2893F dot 1010207 at redhat dot com> <CANu=DmgS86Tgy=Wu=dGNMdgckxjDxVoxXsp2OmvTkENBd-uoeg at mail dot gmail dot com> <53BE5454 dot 1040800 at arm dot com>
On 10 July 2014 09:52, Kyrill Tkachov <kyrylo.tkachov@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 08/07/14 15:02, Will Newton wrote:
>>
>> On 1 July 2014 11:11, Nicholas Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Will,
>>>
>>>
>>>> bfd/ChangeLog:
>>>>
>>>> 2014-06-26 Will Newton <will.newton@linaro.org>
>>>>
>>>> * elf32-arm.c (ELF_MAXPAGESIZE): Increase the default
>>>> value to 64kB and remove custom setting for NaCl.
>>>>
>>>> ld/ChangeLog:
>>>>
>>>> 2014-06-26 Will Newton <will.newton@linaro.org>
>>>>
>>>> * emulparams/armelf_linux.sh (TEXT_START_ADDR): Increase
>>>> alignment to 64kB boundary.
>>>>
>>>> ld/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>>
>>>> 2014-06-26 Will Newton <will.newton@linaro.org>
>>>>
>>>> * ld-arm/arm-lib.ld: Increase MAXPAGESIZE value to
>>>> match bfd.
>>>> * ld-arm/cortex-a8-fix-bl-rel-plt.d: Update offsets to
>>>> take into account increased segment alignment.
>>>> * ld-arm/ifunc-gdesc.r: Likewise.
>>>> * ld-arm/tls-lib.d: Likewise.
>>>
>>>
>>> Approved - please apply.
>>
>> Thanks. If anybody sees any breakage then please shout.
>
> Hi Will,
>
> In the libstdc++ tetsuite I'm seeing some failures of the sort:
>
> /arm-none-eabi/install/arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: address of
> `text-segment' isn't multiple of maximum page size
>
> FAIL: 17_intro/freestanding.cc (test for excess errors)
>
> I haven't dug into it yet, but your patch is the first that came to mind
> when seeing this.
> Is that a problem in gcc/libstdc++?
I'm not sure, but it would be interesting to find out. Do you have any
more information e.g. command line or linker script being used?
It seems that building libstdc++ involves building the whole of gcc. :-/
--
Will Newton
Toolchain Working Group, Linaro