On 04/13/2011 03:38 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 04/06/2011 07:20 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 06/04/11 18:24, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 04/06/2011 05:20 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
there were several requests for ARM Cortex-M support on RTEMS
recently. The
first step towards this is a suitable ARM tool chain. I want to use
this event
to clean up the multilibs and switch to the EABI version 5. The
benefit of
EABI version 5 is that this brings RTEMS more in line with the
primary GCC
platform arm-linux-gnueabi.
These patches are not OK with me, because these are widely
incompatible to what has been used in RTEMS up today
Can you please list these incompatibilities. The RTEMS test suite shows
no problems with this tool chain. The GCC test suite looks also good.
[...]
It is not really helpful to claim something without an explanation. The
missing tool chain for the ARM Cortex architecture blocks RTEMS from further
development on a very important embedded systems platform. A lot of competing
real time operating systems provide ARM Cortex support for a long time.
Lets look at the GCC test suite results:
Wow! The improvement is fantastic.
These would impact only new release branches of RTEMS and
we are months away from a new release branch. If something
breaks, now if the time to find it out.
RTEMS 4.11, GCC 4.6.0 (EABI)
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes 72429
# of unexpected failures 200
# of unexpected successes 7
# of expected failures 183
# of unresolved testcases 138
# of unsupported tests 1103
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 25494
# of unexpected failures 11
# of unexpected successes 1
# of expected failures 160
# of unsupported tests 427
RTEMS 4.11, GCC 4.6.0 (old ABI)
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes 43613
# of unexpected failures 15916
# of unexpected successes 8
# of expected failures 181
# of unresolved testcases 11127
# of unsupported tests 1124
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 20709
# of unexpected failures 2590
# of expected failures 157
# of unresolved testcases 291
# of unsupported tests 430
RTEMS 4.10, GCC 4.4.5 (old ABI)
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes 34293
# of unexpected failures 11273
# of expected failures 237
# of unresolved testcases 7878
# of unsupported tests 683
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 15707
# of unexpected failures 1726
# of expected failures 155
# of unresolved testcases 26
# of unsupported tests 194
RTEMS 4.9, GCC 4.3.2 (old ABI)
=== gcc Summary ===
# of expected passes 47164
# of unexpected failures 2070
# of expected failures 97
# of unresolved testcases 92
# of untested testcases 35
# of unsupported tests 792
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes 17019
# of unexpected failures 52
# of unexpected successes 2
# of expected failures 82
# of unresolved testcases 49
# of unsupported tests 164
The EABI tool chain has by far the best test suite results.
The RTEMS test suite was run with the edb7312 BSP and shows good results. It
works also on real hardware with the lpc24xx and lpc32xx BSPs.
All ARM BSPs compile and link all tests with the EABI tool chain.
We use the VFP floating point format in all ARM BSPs since 2010-04-30.
All ARM BSPs support the init and fini array sections since 2010-12-03.
The C++ exceptions change from SJLJ to a table based implementation is an
implementation detail.
The required ARM/Thumb interwork is an enhancement.
I don't claim that the switch to the EABI tool chain will be without problems,
but we have to use it to figure this out. The multilib selection may need
further changes. I am concerned about the enabled exceptions in some libgcc
functions.
--
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research& Development
joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available (256) 722-9985
