This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [RFC 0/6] glibc port to ARC architecture
- From: Vineet Gupta <Vineet dot Gupta1 at synopsys dot com>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: <Cupertino dot Miranda at synopsys dot com>, Vineet Gupta <Vineet dot Gupta1 at synopsys dot com>, <linux-snps-arc at lists dot infradead dot org>, "libc-alpha @ sourceware . org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, "Claudiu Zissulescu" <Claudiu dot Zissulescu at synopsys dot com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 12:35:44 -0800
- Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] glibc port to ARC architecture
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha
- References: <1498550454-3560-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <357a6f84-3f71-d3b7-9c19-4f0390e5db8d@redhat.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1706271157100.17677@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
On 06/27/2017 05:00 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 06/27/2017 10:00 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote:
This is a Request for comments for glibc port to ARC architecture.
http://www.synopsys.com/IP/ProcessorIP/ARCProcessors/Pages/default.aspx
The Linux kernel, uClibc, buildroot have been upstream for quite some time.
Is it possible to build the new port with scripts/build-many-glibcs.py?
More specifically:
Any new port should have support added to build-many-glibcs.py for all
ABIs supported by the port (e.g. both endiannesses, if you support both BE
and LE, and any other ABI variants).
build-many-glibcs.py works for ARC now - after the 2 backports to gcc 7.2
You should make sure that produces clean test results for all the
compilation tests, for all those variants.
You should also include results for the full testsuite, including
execution tests (whether testing natively, or cross testing with
test-wrapper set to execute tests for a cross build), in the submission of
the port (and those should be as clean as possible).
ATM we have around 200 failures for upstream tools (likely due to libgcc unwinder
patch not yet merged upstream). And just for data point, with github based gcc
including the non-merged patches that number comes down to ~100. Bunch of them are
in math/doubler and some in backtrace/nptl. Will this be considered a blocker. I'm
almost ready for next round, rebased recently !
-Vineet