search for: cczbl31i

On 2010-06-04 13:41, Sanjeev C wrote: > I get following errors: > > /home/llvm-gcc-4.2-2.7.source/host-i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc/xgcc > -B/home/llvm-gcc-4.2-2.7.source/host-i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc/ > -B/usr/local/armv7fl-montavista-linux-gnueabi/bin/ > -B/usr/local/armv7fl-montavista-linux-gnueabi/lib/ -isystem > /usr/local/armv7fl-montavista-linux-gnueabi/include -isystem >

This is the full description of errors I am getting /home/llvm-gcc-4.2-2.7.source/host-i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc/xgcc -B/home/llvm-gcc-4.2-2.7.source/host-i686-pc-linux-gnu/gcc/ -B/usr/local/armv7fl-montavista-linux-gnueabi/bin/ -B/usr/local/armv7fl-montavista-linux-gnueabi/lib/ -isystem /usr/local/armv7fl-montavista-linux-gnueabi/include -isystem

I'm getting following errors while cross compiling llvm for ARM. Please help since it is urgent and critical My gcc version is 4.2.0, 32bit Linux and target is ARM Configure options are: ./configure --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --target=armv7fl-montavista-linux-gnueabi --enable-cross --with-sysroot=/home//arm_v7_vfp_le/target/

Hello > /tmp/cczBL31y.s:409: rdhi, rdlo and rm must all be different This is binutils bug fixed ~2 years ago: http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2007-11/msg00046.html Make sure you're using the latest binutils for ARM (from binutils CVS) -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

Hello, Thanks for the reply. We have an product whose one part has lot of algorithms doing some graphics work. Our intention was to figure out if there can be any performance gain if we use llvm instead of native ARM. This is for ARM target. Earlier, I have built this component using llvm and tested it on x86. Performance was 4x as compared to native gcc. Then I built llvm for ARM and tested

Hi, Any help would b appreicated. This is one of my critical assignment. Thanks Sanjeev On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Sanjeev chugh <sanjuchugh at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Thanks for the reply. We have an product whose one part has lot of > algorithms doing some graphics work. Our intention was to figure out if > there can be any performance gain if we use llvm