On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 01:30:36AM +0800, Mingzheng Xing wrote:
On 8/24/23 19:32, Mingzheng Xing wrote:That sounds good to me. Can you make that a real patch please?
On 8/23/23 21:31, Conor Dooley wrote:Hi, Conor.
On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 12:51:13PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:I reproduced the error, the combination of gcc-11.1 and
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 03:20:24PM +0000,So uh, are we sure that this should not be:
patchwork-bot+linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello:*sigh* so this breaks the build for gcc-11 & binutils 2.37 w/
This patch was applied to riscv/linux.git (fixes)
by Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 00:56:48 +0800 you wrote:
Binutils-2.38 and GCC-12.1.0 bumped[0][1] the defaultHere is the summary with links:
ISA spec to the newer
20191213 version which moves some instructions from the
I extension to the
Zicsr and Zifencei extensions. So if one of the binutils
and GCC exceeds
that version, we should explicitly specifying Zicsr and
Zifencei via -march
to cope with the new changes. but this only occurs when
binutils >= 2.36
and GCC >= 11.1.0. It's a different story when binutils < 2.36.
[...]
- [v5] riscv: Handle zicsr/zifencei issue between gcc and binutils
https://git.kernel.org/riscv/c/ca09f772ccca
Assembler messages:
Error: cannot find default versions of the ISA extension `zicsr'
Error: cannot find default versions of the ISA extension `zifencei'
I'll have a poke later.
- depends on (CC_IS_CLANG && CLANG_VERSION < 170000) ||
(CC_IS_GCC && GCC_VERSION < 110100)
+ depends on (CC_IS_CLANG && CLANG_VERSION < 170000) ||
(CC_IS_GCC && GCC_VERSION <= 110100)
My gcc-11.1 + binutils 2.37 toolchain built from riscv-gnu-toolchain
doesn't have the default versions & the above diff fixes the build.
binutils 2.37 does cause errors. What a surprise, since binutils
2.36 and 2.38 are fine.
I used git bisect to locate this commit[1] for binutils.
I'll test this diff in more detail later. Thanks!
[1] https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commit;h=f0bae2552db1dd4f1995608fbf6648fcee4e9e0c
The above error does originate from link[1] mentioned above, which was
resolved in gcc-12.1.0[2], and gcc-11.3.0 made the backport[3].
So gcc-11.2.0 combined with binutils 2.37 produces the same error.
I think we should do the following diff to fix it:
- depends on (CC_IS_CLANG && CLANG_VERSION < 170000) || (CC_IS_GCC &&
GCC_VERSION < 110100)
+ depends on (CC_IS_CLANG && CLANG_VERSION < 170000) || (CC_IS_GCC &&
GCC_VERSION < 110300)
Thanks for working on it :)