[OE-core] [oe-core][patch v2] sanity.bbclass: correct the gcc_arch check logic
Randy MacLeod
randy.macleod at windriver.com
Tue Jul 23 17:24:36 UTC 2013
On 13-07-05 04:23 AM, Luo Zhenhua-B19537 wrote:
> Hi Randy,
>
> Any update? Can this patch be applied?
>
> Now "sed -e 's/if status != 0/if status == 0/' sanity.bbclass" is needed in my test script to ensure Yocto can work on our build server.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Zhenhua
Zhenhua,
I apologize for the huge delay (vacation, day job, ...).
Mark and I worked on this and he sent:
commit c126729b29822d3602c9c4fd9016cc79b6057fc5
Author: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle at windriver.com>
Date: Mon Jul 15 15:10:26 2013 -0500
sanity.bbclass: Update gcc sanity check
which seems like the right solution.
// Randy
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Luo Zhenhua-B19537
>> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 12:04 PM
>> To: 'Randy MacLeod'
>> Cc: openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org; Yu Zongchun-B40527; Hatle,
>> Mark
>> Subject: RE: [OE-core] [oe-core][patch v2] sanity.bbclass: correct the
>> gcc_arch check logic
>>
>> Randy,
>>
>> Thanks for the details.
>>
>> Following is my trial result, FYI.
>>
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$ lsb_release -a
>> LSB Version: :core-4.0-amd64:core-4.0-ia32:core-4.0-noarch:graphics-
>> 4.0-amd64:graphics-4.0-ia32:graphics-4.0-noarch:printing-4.0-
>> amd64:printing-4.0-ia32:printing-4.0-noarch
>> Distributor ID: CentOS
>> Description: CentOS release 5.9 (Final)
>> Release: 5.9
>> Codename: Final
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$ gcc -v
>> Using built-in specs.
>> Target: x86_64-redhat-linux
>> Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man --
>> infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-
>> checking=release --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-
>> libunwind-exceptions --enable-libgcj-multifile --enable-
>> languages=c,c++,objc,obj-c++,java,fortran,ada --enable-java-awt=gtk --
>> disable-dssi --disable-plugin --with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-
>> gcj-1.4.2.0/jre --with-cpu=generic --host=x86_64-redhat-linux Thread
>> model: posix gcc version 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-54) [b19537 at busy
>> ~]$ [b19537 at busy ~]$ cat gcc_test_new.c int main (){ volatile int atomic
>> = 2; __sync_bool_compare_and_swap (&atomic, 2, 3); return 0;}
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$ [b19537 at busy ~]$ gcc -o gcc_test_new gcc_test_new.c
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$ echo $?
>> 0
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$ gcc -march=native -o gcc_test_new gcc_test_new.c
>> gcc_test_new.c:1: error: bad value (native) for -march= switch
>> gcc_test_new.c:1: error: bad value (native) for -mtune= switch
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$ echo $?
>> 1
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$ gcc -march=x86-64 -o gcc_test_new gcc_test_new.c
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$ echo $?
>> 0
>> [b19537 at busy ~]$
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Zhenhua
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Randy MacLeod [mailto:randy.macleod at windriver.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 6:17 AM
>>> To: Luo Zhenhua-B19537
>>> Cc: openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org; Yu Zongchun-B40527;
>>> Hatle, Mark
>>> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [oe-core][patch v2] sanity.bbclass: correct the
>>> gcc_arch check logic
>>>
>>> On 13-06-19 11:28 PM, Luo Zhenhua-B19537 wrote:
>>>> Ping.
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Luo Zhenhua-B19537
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 9:26 PM
>>>>> To: 'Richard Purdie'; Randy MacLeod
>>>>> Cc: openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org; Yu Zongchun-B40527
>>>>> Subject: RE: [OE-core] [oe-core][patch v2] sanity.bbclass: correct
>>>>> the gcc_arch check logic
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Randy,
>>>>>
>>>>> During the test on my machine with gcc-4.1.2, if -march=native is
>>>>> not supported by host gcc, a non-zero value(256) returns, otherwise
>>>>> 0
>>> returns.
>>>>>
>>>>> [LOG]
>>>>> status is 256
>>>>> result is gcc_test.c:1: error: bad value (native) for -march=
>>>>> switch
>>>>> gcc_test.c:1: error: bad value (native) for -mtune= switch
>>>>>
>>>>> Please confirm if this is same as your result.
>>>
>>> Yes it's essentially the same.
>>>
>>> Mark decided that the previous test program that checked for the
>>> existence of:
>>> __GCC_HAVE_SYNC_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_4
>>> would be better done as a check for:
>>> __sync_bool_compare_and_swap
>>> I believe he got the idea from looking at glib's configure script.
>>>
>>> I'm working on properly checking on which value to give to march:
>>> native,i686,x86-64. More tomorrow.
>>>
>>> // Randy
>>>
>>> Test results and prelim code if you are interested.
>>>
>>>
>>> Here's how that test behaves with the old toolchain:
>>>
>>> ### What's the host setup?
>>>
>>> $ gcc --version
>>> gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-54) Copyright (C) 2006 Free
>>> Software Foundation, Inc.
>>> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There
>>> is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
>>> PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>>>
>>> $ head -1 /etc/issue
>>> CentOS release 5.9 (Final)
>>>
>>>
>>> ### Old test and results: All options fail, returning a status of 1.
>>>
>>> $ gcc -o /tmp/jj /tmp/gcc-jj.c
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c: In function ‘main’:
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c:1: error: ‘__GCC_HAVE_SYNC_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_4’
>>> undeclared (first use in this function)
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c:1: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only
>>> once
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c:1: error: for each function it appears in.)
>>>
>>> $ echo $?
>>> 1
>>>
>>>
>>> $ gcc -march=native -o /tmp/jj /tmp/gcc-jj.c
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c:1: error: bad value (native) for -march= switch
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c:1: error: bad value (native) for -mtune= switch $ echo $?
>>> 1
>>>
>>> $ gcc -march=i686 -o /tmp/jj /tmp/gcc-jj.c
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c: In function ‘main’:
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c:1: error: ‘__GCC_HAVE_SYNC_COMPARE_AND_SWAP_4’
>>> undeclared (first use in this function)
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c:1: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only
>>> once
>>> /tmp/gcc-jj.c:1: error: for each function it appears in.) $ echo $?
>>> 1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ### New test and results: -march=`mangle uname -m` works.
>>>
>>> $ cat /tmp/gcc_test.c
>>> int main (){ volatile int atomic = 2; __sync_bool_compare_and_swap
>>> (&atomic, 2, 3); return 0;}
>>>
>>>
>>> $ gcc -o /tmp/jj /tmp/gcc_test.c
>>> /tmp/ccEVX7IX.o: In function `main':
>>> gcc_test.c:(.text+0x2f): undefined reference to
>>> `__sync_bool_compare_and_swap_4'
>>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>>> $ echo $?
>>> 1
>>>
>>> $ gcc -march=native -o /tmp/jj /tmp/gcc_test.c
>>> /tmp/gcc_test.c:1: error: bad value (native) for -march= switch
>>> /tmp/gcc_test.c:1: error: bad value (native) for -mtune= switch $ echo
>>> $?
>>> 1
>>>
>>> $ uname -m
>>> i686
>>>
>>> $ gcc -march=i686 -o /tmp/jj /tmp/gcc_test.c
>>> rmacleod at yow-lpggp1 .../wrs/b/snty $ echo $?
>>> 0
>>>
>>> So you see that -march=native isn't useful for gcc-4.1.2 but
>>> -march=`munged uname -m` is.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm in the middle of writing a more complete test but my lack of
>>> python development is showing:
>>>
>>>
>>> -# Checks if necessary to add option march to host gcc
>>> +# Checks if necessary to add march option to host gcc
>>> def check_gcc_march(sanity_data):
>>> - result = False
>>> + result = ""
>>>
>>> # Check if -march not in BUILD_CFLAGS
>>> if sanity_data.getVar("BUILD_CFLAGS",True).find("-march") < 0:
>>> @@ -293,12 +293,22 @@ def check_gcc_march(sanity_data):
>>> # Check if GCC could work without march
>>> status,result = oe.utils.getstatusoutput("${BUILD_PREFIX}gcc
>>> gcc_test.c -o gcc_test")
>>> if status != 0:
>>> - # Check if GCC could work with march
>>> + # Check if GCC could work with march=native
>>> status,result =
>>> oe.utils.getstatusoutput("${BUILD_PREFIX}gcc -march=native gcc_test.c
>>> -o
>>> gcc_test")
>>> - if status != 0:
>>> - result = True
>>> + if status == 0:
>>> + result = "native"
>>> else:
>>> - result = False
>>> + # Check if GCC could work with march=i686
>>> + status,result =
>>> oe.utils.getstatusoutput("${BUILD_PREFIX}gcc -march=x86-64 gcc_test.c
>>> -o
>>> gcc_test")
>>> + if status == 0:
>>> + result = "x86-64"
>>> + else:
>>> + # Check if GCC could work with march=i686
>>> + status,result =
>>> oe.utils.getstatusoutput("${BUILD_PREFIX}gcc -march=i686 gcc_test.c -o
>>> gcc_test")
>>> + if status == 0:
>>> + result = "i686"
>>> + else:
>>> + result = "none"
>>>
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> - if check_gcc_march(d):
>>> - status.addresult("Your gcc version is older than 4.5, please
>>> add the following param to local.conf\n \
>>> - BUILD_CFLAGS_append = \" -march=native\"\n")
>>> + gcc_march_option = check_gcc_march(d)
>>> + if gcc_march_option != "":
>>> + if gcc_march_option == "none":
>>> + status.addresult("Your gcc version is too old.\n \
>>> + else:
>>> + status.addresult("Your gcc version is older than 4.5,
>>> please add the following param to local.conf\n \
>>> + BUILD_CFLAGS_append = \" -march=%s\"\n",
>>> gcc_march_option)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'll clean this up to actually work and probably use ${BUILD_ARCH}
>>> instead of i686/x86-64.
>>>
>>> More tomorrow.
>>>
>>> // Randy
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Zhenhua
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Richard Purdie [mailto:richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org]
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 9:04 PM
>>>>>> To: Luo Zhenhua-B19537; Randy MacLeod
>>>>>> Cc: openembedded-core at lists.openembedded.org; Yu Zongchun-B40527
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [oe-core][patch v2] sanity.bbclass: correct
>>> the
>>>>>> gcc_arch check logic
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 21:08 +0800, Zhenhua Luo wrote:
>>>>>>> The gcc arch check result is incorrect when gcc version is older
>>>>>>> than
>>>>>> 4.5.
>>>>>>> Sanity checker requests user to add "-march=native" into
>>>>>>> BUILD_CFLAGS even if the flag is not supported by host gcc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The status is 0 when -march=native is supported by host gcc, so
>>>>>>> set result to True, otherwise set result to False.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Luo <zhenhua.luo at freescale.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> meta/classes/sanity.bbclass | 2 +-
>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
>>>>>>> b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass index 3b9934b..ee09679 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
>>>>>>> +++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
>>>>>>> @@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ def check_gcc_march(sanity_data):
>>>>>>> if status != 0:
>>>>>>> # Check if GCC could work with march
>>>>>>> status,result =
>>>>>> oe.utils.getstatusoutput("${BUILD_PREFIX}gcc -march=native
>>>>>> gcc_test.c -o
>>>>>> gcc_test")
>>>>>>> - if status != 0:
>>>>>>> + if status == 0:
>>>>>>> result = True
>>>>>>> else:
>>>>>>> result = False
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you and Randy please sort out what the correct value is here
>>> please.
>>>>>> This appears to directly revert
>>>>>>
>>> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=ad276d7d89190c57a
>>>>>> 152
>>>>>> 867d7278ee18f784ff2c
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> # Randy MacLeod. SMTS, Linux, Wind River
>>> Direct: 613.963.1350
>
--
# Randy MacLeod. SMTS, Linux, Wind River
Direct: 613.963.1350
More information about the Openembedded-core
mailing list