search for: libgloss

...ks them as errors after rpm build. Add another newlib patch and apply it during stubdom build. I: A function uses a ''return;'' statement, but has actually a value to return, like an integer (''return 42;'') or similar. W: xen voidreturn ../../../../newlib-1.16.0/libgloss/i386/cygmon-gmon.c:117, 125, 146, 157, 330 I: Program is using implicit definitions of special functions. these functions need to use their correct prototypes to allow the lightweight buffer overflow checking to work. - Implicit memory/string functions need #include <string.h>....

...rote: >> Another related thing is that even when I defined -emit-llvm in >> what I thought would be a global CFLAGS for all of newlib, it did >> not get propagated to all subdirectories. > > Oh? Which ones did it not get propagated to? I did not see it being propagated to libgloss, but maybe I was trying to define the flags at the wrong place. Since the llvm-gcc shell script solved my immediate problem, I did not bother looking any further. -- Pertti

...thing is that even when I defined -emit-llvm in > >> what I thought would be a global CFLAGS for all of newlib, it did > >> not get propagated to all subdirectories. > > > > Oh? Which ones did it not get propagated to? > > I did not see it being propagated to libgloss, but maybe I > was trying to define the flags at the wrong place. Since the > llvm-gcc shell script solved my immediate problem, I did not > bother looking any further. I don't think I understand the problem properly. I thought you were claiming that CFLAGS was not being passed down t...

Reid Spencer kirjoitti: > So, now I'm not sure what you're talking about. Is > libgloss part of newlib? If so, please note that it is not llvm-gcc's > job to pass CFLAGS down. That would be a bug in the newlib makefiles. :) Sorry for being obtuse. Yes, if there indeed is a bug, it is in the newlib build system. I was trying to compile newlib with llvm-gcc. The need for propag...

...ccording to: http://www.embecosm.com/appnotes/ean9/ean9-howto-newlib-1.0.html#id2711887 newlib intends to support binaries for bare metal (no OS) software. It implements only the hardware independent parts (e.g libc and libm) and leave a stub for each hardware dependent syscall (e.g everything in libgloss). In fact I tried to compile a simple "hello world" c program using arm-none-eabi-gcc which was configured with "--with-newlib" option, the program execution ends up with segmentation faults on both qemu-arm and gem5. Questions: I'm not sure if the newlib is compatible wit...

I managed to compile newlib with llvm-gcc yesterday. That is, the machine independent part is now basically done, and the syscall part contains no-op stubs provided by libgloss. I haven't tested the port yet, but since newlib has already been ported to many architectures, I would be pretty surprised if there were any major problems. A couple of things I noticed when configuring newlib for LLVM. First, I did not find any preprocessor symbols that I could use to identi...

On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 at 17:48, Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: > I looked at your diffs and you've only changed one of the functions to > return SDValue(), you need to change lowerFP_TO_SINT itself too. The > one with the store is just there as an optimization; if it doesn't > trigger (because of your diff) then lowerFP_TO_SINT will still create > a

Hi Pertti, On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 15:29 +0200, Pertti Kellomäki wrote: > I managed to compile newlib with llvm-gcc yesterday. That > is, the machine independent part is now basically done, and > the syscall part contains no-op stubs provided by libgloss. > I haven't tested the port yet, but since newlib has already > been ported to many architectures, I would be pretty surprised > if there were any major problems. Very nice. > A couple of things I noticed when configuring newlib for LLVM. > First, I did not find any preprocess...

Hello, Emmanuel > I'm used to build GCC (4.x) toolchains with newlib, but how can I do > the same with llvm-gcc ? Pretty much same way as with gcc. E.g. via --with-newlib, etc. > It seems that clang attemps to find the header files from the host > system dir, not from the target system dir, so I guess that I missed > an important option ... somewhere. clang is not pretty well

...gt;> the same with llvm-gcc ? > Pretty much same way as with gcc. E.g. via --with-newlib, etc. I successfully built llvm+clang, but it seems that the newlib library files have neither been compiled nor installed. With GCC (at the time 4.5.2), the build steps are straightforward: newlib/ and libgloss/ directories should be copied/linked to the top level directory of the GCC source directory, and the --with-newlib option switch enabled as a 'configure' parameter. The library gets built along with GCC, and installed into the GCC destination folders (libc.a, libm.a, ... as well as the head...

> Virtually all. As far as I could test, all major architectures > (v4/v5/v6 + v7-A-R-M), although I'm still fighting with some Thumb > code generation. Not a big issue for me: targets are ARMv4 (ARM7) and ARMv5 (ARM9) "classic" CPUs - in ARM terminology. No cortex. > I haven't tested dragonegg, but clang and llvm-gcc do the job. > llvm-gcc seems to be more in

I have been browsing through the newlib documentation at <http://sources.redhat.com/newlib/> and pondering about how newlib relates to LLVM. Comments welcome, again. As I see it, there are basically two parts of libc that need to be considered. Much of libc is stuff like atoi(), isalpha(), etc. which are just convenience routines written in ANSI C. For these, it should be sufficient to

We are going to use LLVM in a compiler project for transport triggered processors. See Wikipedia for more on transport triggering: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_Triggered_Architectures>. One thing we need is some sort of libc. We are targeting embedded systems, and I have been looking at things like newlib. Are there people out there doing something similar? Or any advice or

...ent/open64r.c:62:3: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘_open64’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] * ../../../../../newlib-1.16.0/newlib/libc/reent/lseek64r.c:61:3: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘lseek64’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] * ../../../../newlib-1.16.0/libgloss/i386/cygmon-gmon.c:355:7: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘profil’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] * ../grub-upstream/stage2/builtins.c:1728:3: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘do_exit’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] * /mnt/gen2/TmpDir/portage/app-emulation/xen-p...

.../ baseboards framework.exp mondfe.exp standard.exp testglue.c config ftp.exp remote.exp stub-loader.c tip.exp debugger.exp kermit.exp rlogin.exp target.exp util-defs.exp dejagnu.exp libexec rsh.exp targetdb.exp utils.exp dg.exp libgloss.exp runtest.exp telnet.exp xsh.exp ------------------- Henrik. ============================================================= Henrik Bach LLVM Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= 'Nothing is imp...

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Henrik Bach wrote: > You're right. And no errors or results where generated: > PATH=/C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-2-1/Debug/bin:/C/projects/src/llvm-2/llvm/test/Scripts:.:/usr/local/bin:/mingw/bin:/bin:/mingw/bin:/usr/bin:/c/LLVM/tools:/c/perl/5.8.5/bin:/c/perl/5.8.5/bin/MSWin32-x86-multi-thread > \ > true runtest > make[1]: Leaving directory

You're right. And no errors or results where generated: -------------------- if test -d "/C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-2-1/test" ; then \ if test -f "/C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-2-1/test/Makefile" ; then \ echo llvm[0]: Running test suite ; \ make -C /C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-2-1/test check-local \ TESTSUITE= ; \ else \ echo llvm[0]: No Makefile in

...g. - Substituted clang for arm-none-eabi-gcc after after removing the libraries I had clang equivalents for. This is obviously not a great user experience, the BareMetal driver needs quite a bit of work. Unfortunately due to the needs of multilib and the dependencies between newlib/newlib-nano and libgloss components that gcc uses specs files for, this is not simple. Peter > Christian Richter > > > > On 14.12.2018 18:28, Peter Smith wrote: > > Hello again Christian, > > > > I've posted https://reviews.llvm.org/D55709 to see if we can get the > > documentat...

...or arm-none-eabi-gcc after after removing the > libraries I had clang equivalents for. > > This is obviously not a great user experience, the BareMetal driver > needs quite a bit of work. Unfortunately due to the needs of multilib > and the dependencies between newlib/newlib-nano and libgloss > components that gcc uses specs files for, this is not simple. > > Peter > > Christian Richter > > > > On 14.12.2018 18:28, Peter Smith wrote: > > Hello again Christian, > > I've posted https://reviews.llvm.org/D55709 to see if we can get the > documen...

...or arm-none-eabi-gcc after after removing the > libraries I had clang equivalents for. > > This is obviously not a great user experience, the BareMetal driver > needs quite a bit of work. Unfortunately due to the needs of multilib > and the dependencies between newlib/newlib-nano and libgloss > components that gcc uses specs files for, this is not simple. > > Peter > > Christian Richter > > > > On 14.12.2018 18:28, Peter Smith wrote: > > Hello again Christian, > > I've posted https://reviews.llvm.org/D55709 to see if we can get the > documen...