This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
RE: [PATCH, binutils, ARM, 0/16] Add support for Armv8.1-M Mainline
Hi Alan,
Thanks for the heads up. I am on holidays so I don't have much time to look at this right now. But after a quick look I think the arm-pe fails are due to objdump printing the branch targets in a different format. I'll double-check later, but it should be a case of accepting both answers.
The VxWorks failures seem to be related to the relocations. I did a quick search but couldn't determine whether VxWorks uses Elf binary format. Do you reckon VxWorks should support this elf relocation? If so I'll need to look at it a bit further, otherwise I'll skip the relocation tests for VxWorks.
Cheers,
Andre
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>
Sent: 16 April 2019 02:58
To: Andre Simoes Dias Vieira <Andre.SimoesDiasVieira@arm.com>
Cc: nickc@redhat.com; binutils@sourceware.org; nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, binutils, ARM, 0/16] Add support for Armv8.1-M Mainline
These failures remain.
arm-pe +FAIL: Valid Armv8.1-M Mainline BF instruction arm-pe +FAIL: Valid Armv8.1-M Mainline BFCSEL instruction arm-pe +FAIL: Valid Armv8.1-M Mainline BFL instruction arm-pe +FAIL: Valid Armv8.1-M Mainline Low Overhead loop instructions arm-vxworks +FAIL: Valid Armv8.1-M Mainline BF instruction with relocation arm-vxworks +FAIL: Valid Armv8.1-M Mainline BFL instruction with relocation
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM
- References:
- [PATCH, binutils, ARM, 0/16] Add support for Armv8.1-M Mainline
- From: Andre Vieira (lists)
- Re: [PATCH, binutils, ARM, 0/16] Add support for Armv8.1-M Mainline
- Re: [PATCH, binutils, ARM, 0/16] Add support for Armv8.1-M Mainline
- From: Andre Vieira (lists)
- Re: [PATCH, binutils, ARM, 0/16] Add support for Armv8.1-M Mainline
- RE: [PATCH, binutils, ARM, 0/16] Add support for Armv8.1-M Mainline
- From: Andre Simoes Dias Vieira
- Re: [PATCH, binutils, ARM, 0/16] Add support for Armv8.1-M Mainline