search for: r_arm_call

Oh, so it looks like I hit a bit of a wall there :-) I’ll take a look thanks. That bug talks about R_ARM_THM_CALL which I assume are thumb related. Will your implementation fix also R_ARM_CALL errors? > On 28 Jun 2017, at 17:15, Peter Smith <peter.smith at linaro.org> wrote: > > Hello Alessandro, > > The LLD ARM port doesn't currently support range extension thunks, > these are needed to extend the range of ARM branch relocations when > the size of the e...

...till trying to learn how > Ubuntu multilibs work). > > Would it be possible for you to share the details of which objects > contain the R_ARM_THM_MOVW_ABS_NC relocations when compiled -fpic? Hi, the errors I get do not seen to mention R_ARM_THM_MOVW_ABS_NC. The errors are “relocation R_ARM_CALL out of range”. Today I recompiled everything from scratch with -fPIC to make sure I had no library compiled without it and I still get the same errors. Sorry, I could not find any trivial code that has the same issue yet. Following is the output of the compilation process: yawmoo at yawmoo-MRNM...

...ccessfully used Peter's patches to get past those relocation errors. On 6/28/17, 9:36 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Peter Smith via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: Yes it should cover the following relocations: R_ARM_CALL (ARM BL/BLX) R_ARM_JUMP24 (ARM B) R_ARM_THM_CALL (Thumb BL/BLX) R_ARM_THM_JUMP19 (Thumb conditional B<cc>.w) R_ARM_THM_JMP24 (Thumb unconditional B.w) Peter On 28 June 2017 at 17:31, Alessandro Pistocchi <apukfreelance at gmail.com> wrote: >...

...past those relocation errors. > > On 6/28/17, 9:36 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Peter Smith via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Yes it should cover the following relocations: > R_ARM_CALL (ARM BL/BLX) > R_ARM_JUMP24 (ARM B) > R_ARM_THM_CALL (Thumb BL/BLX) > R_ARM_THM_JUMP19 (Thumb conditional B<cc>.w) > R_ARM_THM_JMP24 (Thumb unconditional B.w) > > Peter > > >> On 28 June 2017 at 17:31, Ales...

...ation errors. >>> >>> On 6/28/17, 9:36 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Peter Smith via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> Yes it should cover the following relocations: >>> R_ARM_CALL (ARM BL/BLX) >>> R_ARM_JUMP24 (ARM B) >>> R_ARM_THM_CALL (Thumb BL/BLX) >>> R_ARM_THM_JUMP19 (Thumb conditional B<cc>.w) >>> R_ARM_THM_JMP24 (Thumb unconditional B.w) >>> >>> Peter >>> >>> >>>> On...

> On 26 Jun 2017, at 16:25, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:40 AM, Alessandro Pistocchi via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to build a completely GNU free linux toolchain for the raspberry pi. > > I successfully managed to compile llvm and clang

...; Awesome results! >>> >> I'm surprised! LLD is barely working on ARM at the moment. :) >> >> [snip] > My mistake. ARM worked for small programs, but lld failed for clang with a > bunch of these errors: > /home/rich/ellcc-release/bin/ld.lld: error: relocation R_ARM_CALL out of > range > > Sorry about the misinformation. > > -Rich > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20161029/d71721ce/attachment.html>

...lvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> Awesome results! > I'm surprised! LLD is barely working on ARM at the moment. :) > [snip] My mistake. ARM worked for small programs, but lld failed for clang with a bunch of these errors: /home/rich/ellcc-release/bin/ld.lld: error: relocation R_ARM_CALL out of range Sorry about the misinformation. -Rich

On 28 October 2016 at 23:02, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Awesome results! I'm surprised! LLD is barely working on ARM at the moment. :) > I wonder if ARM32 BE is a real thing. I know that the processor is > bi-endian, but is there any system that uses ARM32 in big-endian mode? Yes... it is "a thing". :) ARM has two modes: BE32 and

...t; (sub (add (ptrtoint @foo) 0xeafffffe) cur_pos) > > no? I'm not sure if this would be sufficient. The R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation on ARM has specific semantics to implement ARM/Thumb interworking; see http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0044e/IHI0044E_aaelf.pdf Note that R_ARM_CALL has the same operation but different semantics. I suppose that we could try looking at the addend to decide which relocation to use, but this would mean adding more complexity to the assembler (along with any pattern matching that would need to be done). It seems simpler, both conceptually and in t...

...00, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > > I'm not sure if this would be sufficient. The R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation > > on ARM has specific semantics to implement ARM/Thumb interworking; see > > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0044e/IHI0044E_aaelf.pdf > > Note that R_ARM_CALL has the same operation but different semantics. > > I suppose that we could try looking at the addend to decide which relocation > > to use, but this would mean adding more complexity to the assembler (along > > with any pattern matching that would need to be done). It seems simpl...

...> I'm not sure if this would be sufficient. The R_ARM_JUMP24 relocation > >> > on ARM has specific semantics to implement ARM/Thumb interworking; see > >> > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0044e/ > IHI0044E_aaelf.pdf > >> > Note that R_ARM_CALL has the same operation but different semantics. > >> > I suppose that we could try looking at the addend to decide which > relocation > >> > to use, but this would mean adding more complexity to the assembler > (along > >> > with any pattern matching that w...

...>> >> > on ARM has specific semantics to implement ARM/Thumb interworking; > >> >> > see > >> >> > > >> >> > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ihi0044e/ > IHI0044E_aaelf.pdf > >> >> > Note that R_ARM_CALL has the same operation but different > semantics. > >> >> > I suppose that we could try looking at the addend to decide which > >> >> > relocation > >> >> > to use, but this would mean adding more complexity to the assembler > >> &gt...

...gt; interworking; > >> >> >> > see > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc. > ihi0044e/IHI0044E_aaelf.pdf > >> >> >> > Note that R_ARM_CALL has the same operation but different > >> >> >> > semantics. > >> >> >> > I suppose that we could try looking at the addend to decide > which > >> >> >> > relocation > >> >> >> > to use, but this woul...