Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
Hello, Am 02.11.2010 18:38, schrieb Albert ARIBAUD: The problem is that the first patch posted here places .rel.dyn after ..bss, so when dumping u-boot.img, all of .bss is included in the file. Keeping it before .bss allows the flat binary to omit .bss as usual. Indeed, but that accounts only for about 60k, as I said. Steve talks about a 200k delta; I can't find how this much can be added just by moving the .rel.dyn section around. The idea of having .text, .*data and .bss contiguous is that it will reduce RAM footprint. In order to keep this and not increase FLASH/NAND footprint, I think we can overlap .bss and .rel.dyn. Using the patch quoted above, I get a working u-boot from all combinations of gcc and binutils I cared to try, including gcc 4.5-linaro with binutils 2.20.1. Thanks for the feedback. Sorry, I never had an interest in the size of u-boot, therefore I haven't had a look at the size. I've taken the time to compile u-boot with those gcc's I'm using here and with the patch which adds rel.* after and before bss: after bss before arm926ejs 4.3.4 661K381K arm926ejs 4.5.1 641K360K armv7 4.3.5 461K262K armv7 4.5.1 443K244K (both don't work) I've used always binutils 2.20.1. The difference in sizes between arm926ejs (kirkwood ) and armv7 (omap3) are because of different options. For the arm926ejs I'm using a non standard configuration, but for the armv7 I've used the standard config for the Beagleboard (make omap3_beagle_config) with the relocation-patch on top of commit 0c0892be0d93a5a892b93739c5eb3bf692fed4ff, so this one can be checked by others against other toolchains too. Regards, Alexander PS: The problem with omap-u-boot and gcc 4.5.1 I'm having here is unrelated to relocation, I have this problem since I've installed gcc 4.5.1, means with older versions of u-boot too (without the new relocation). ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
Le 02/11/2010 05:05, Steve Sakoman a écrit : I've been using gcc 4.3.3, so I haven't run into the issue that this patch is attempting to fix. I tested this patch using gcc 4.3.3, and while it produces a usable image, it causes the size of the image to grow from 227K to 433K! So perhaps we need a patch that uses a more restrictive wildcard. Steve Thanks for pointing this out, Steve. That'll go into V3 of my patch set I guess, as Alexander's patch derives from mine and I most probably hit the same size increase issue as he does. Wolfgang: that may mean the tx25 config file patch is unneeded. Stay tuned. Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
Hello, Am 02.11.2010 05:05, schrieb Steve Sakoman: I've been using gcc 4.3.3, so I haven't run into the issue that this patch is attempting to fix. just to correct this, the problem is a change in binutils and not, as I wrongly assumed earlier, gcc. Using ld from binutils 2.20.1 leads to problems with the relocation without a patch. gcc is unrelated, at least here. I'm unable to get working u-boot for the Beagleboard using gcc 4.5.1 (and binutils 2.20.1), but using gcc 4.3.5 (and binutils 2.20.1) u-boot runs. There seems to be an error with using mmc, but I assume this is unrelated to relocation (as the problem with gcc 4.5.1). Regards, Alexander ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:48 AM, Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@free.fr wrote:
Le 02/11/2010 05:05, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
I've been using gcc 4.3.3, so I haven't run into the issue that this
patch is attempting to fix.
I tested this patch using gcc 4.3.3, and while it produces a usable
image, it causes the size of the image to grow from 227K to 433K!
So perhaps we need a patch that uses a more restrictive wildcard.
Steve
Thanks for pointing this out, Steve. That'll go into V3 of my patch set I
guess, as Alexander's patch derives from mine and I most probably hit the
same size increase issue as he does.
Wolfgang: that may mean the tx25 config file patch is unneeded. Stay tuned.
I should have stated that I was using gcc 4.3.3 and binutils 2.18.50,
since indeed it does seem to be binutils related.
I have had a couple of reports that the following patch works with
recent gcc/binutils without increasing the size of the binary.
Could others check and report results?
Steve
ARMV7: Fix build issue with recent versions of gcc/binutils
---
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
index 88a0fec..e690b58 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ SECTIONS
}
. = ALIGN(4);
__rel_dyn_start = .;
- .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.dyn) }
+ .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.*) }
__rel_dyn_end = .;
__dynsym_start = .;
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
Le 02/11/2010 14:08, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:48 AM, Albert ARIBAUDalbert.arib...@free.fr
wrote:
Le 02/11/2010 05:05, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
I've been using gcc 4.3.3, so I haven't run into the issue that this
patch is attempting to fix.
I tested this patch using gcc 4.3.3, and while it produces a usable
image, it causes the size of the image to grow from 227K to 433K!
So perhaps we need a patch that uses a more restrictive wildcard.
Steve
Thanks for pointing this out, Steve. That'll go into V3 of my patch set I
guess, as Alexander's patch derives from mine and I most probably hit the
same size increase issue as he does.
Wolfgang: that may mean the tx25 config file patch is unneeded. Stay tuned.
I should have stated that I was using gcc 4.3.3 and binutils 2.18.50,
since indeed it does seem to be binutils related.
I have had a couple of reports that the following patch works with
recent gcc/binutils without increasing the size of the binary.
Could others check and report results?
Steve
ARMV7: Fix build issue with recent versions of gcc/binutils
---
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
index 88a0fec..e690b58 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ SECTIONS
}
. = ALIGN(4);
__rel_dyn_start = .;
- .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.dyn) }
+ .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.*) }
__rel_dyn_end = .;
__dynsym_start = .;
Weird... This patch seems indeed more restrictive than mine, but the
input sections collected in .rel.dyn are actually the same for both.
We can gain a bit less than 60k by overlapping .bss and .rel.dyn, but
certainly not 200k!
OTOH, it happened during my 'cross-build' tests (using one chain's gcc
with another chain's ld) that the resulting u-boot was drastically
reduced; but I chalked that to my misusing of the build tools.
Steve, can you indicate which toolchain excatly exhibits the
230k-to-430k issue, and which board I should build?
Amicalement,
--
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@free.fr wrote:
Le 02/11/2010 14:08, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:48 AM, Albert ARIBAUDalbert.arib...@free.fr
wrote:
Le 02/11/2010 05:05, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
I've been using gcc 4.3.3, so I haven't run into the issue that this
patch is attempting to fix.
I tested this patch using gcc 4.3.3, and while it produces a usable
image, it causes the size of the image to grow from 227K to 433K!
So perhaps we need a patch that uses a more restrictive wildcard.
Steve
Thanks for pointing this out, Steve. That'll go into V3 of my patch set I
guess, as Alexander's patch derives from mine and I most probably hit the
same size increase issue as he does.
Wolfgang: that may mean the tx25 config file patch is unneeded. Stay
tuned.
I should have stated that I was using gcc 4.3.3 and binutils 2.18.50,
since indeed it does seem to be binutils related.
I have had a couple of reports that the following patch works with
recent gcc/binutils without increasing the size of the binary.
Could others check and report results?
Steve
ARMV7: Fix build issue with recent versions of gcc/binutils
---
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
index 88a0fec..e690b58 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ SECTIONS
}
. = ALIGN(4);
__rel_dyn_start = .;
- .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.dyn) }
+ .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.*) }
__rel_dyn_end = .;
__dynsym_start = .;
Weird... This patch seems indeed more restrictive than mine, but the input
sections collected in .rel.dyn are actually the same for both.
We can gain a bit less than 60k by overlapping .bss and .rel.dyn, but
certainly not 200k!
OTOH, it happened during my 'cross-build' tests (using one chain's gcc with
another chain's ld) that the resulting u-boot was drastically reduced; but I
chalked that to my misusing of the build tools.
Steve, can you indicate which toolchain excatly exhibits the 230k-to-430k
issue, and which board I should build?
I used gcc 4.3.3 and binutils 2.18.50 and built beagle and overo.
Steve
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
Albert ARIBAUD albert.arib...@free.fr writes:
Le 02/11/2010 14:08, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:48 AM, Albert ARIBAUDalbert.arib...@free.fr
wrote:
Le 02/11/2010 05:05, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
I've been using gcc 4.3.3, so I haven't run into the issue that this
patch is attempting to fix.
I tested this patch using gcc 4.3.3, and while it produces a usable
image, it causes the size of the image to grow from 227K to 433K!
So perhaps we need a patch that uses a more restrictive wildcard.
Steve
Thanks for pointing this out, Steve. That'll go into V3 of my patch set I
guess, as Alexander's patch derives from mine and I most probably hit the
same size increase issue as he does.
Wolfgang: that may mean the tx25 config file patch is unneeded. Stay tuned.
I should have stated that I was using gcc 4.3.3 and binutils 2.18.50,
since indeed it does seem to be binutils related.
I have had a couple of reports that the following patch works with
recent gcc/binutils without increasing the size of the binary.
Could others check and report results?
Steve
ARMV7: Fix build issue with recent versions of gcc/binutils
---
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
index 88a0fec..e690b58 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ SECTIONS
}
. = ALIGN(4);
__rel_dyn_start = .;
-.rel.dyn : { *(.rel.dyn) }
+.rel.dyn : { *(.rel.*) }
__rel_dyn_end = .;
__dynsym_start = .;
Weird... This patch seems indeed more restrictive than mine, but the
input sections collected in .rel.dyn are actually the same for both.
We can gain a bit less than 60k by overlapping .bss and .rel.dyn, but
certainly not 200k!
OTOH, it happened during my 'cross-build' tests (using one chain's gcc
with another chain's ld) that the resulting u-boot was drastically
reduced; but I chalked that to my misusing of the build tools.
Steve, can you indicate which toolchain excatly exhibits the
230k-to-430k issue, and which board I should build?
The problem is that the first patch posted here places .rel.dyn after
.bss, so when dumping u-boot.img, all of .bss is included in the file.
Keeping it before .bss allows the flat binary to omit .bss as usual.
Using the patch quoted above, I get a working u-boot from all
combinations of gcc and binutils I cared to try, including gcc
4.5-linaro with binutils 2.20.1.
--
Måns Rullgård
m...@mansr.com
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
Le 02/11/2010 18:00, Måns Rullgård a écrit :
Albert ARIBAUDalbert.arib...@free.fr writes:
Le 02/11/2010 14:08, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:48 AM, Albert ARIBAUDalbert.arib...@free.fr
wrote:
Le 02/11/2010 05:05, Steve Sakoman a écrit :
I've been using gcc 4.3.3, so I haven't run into the issue that this
patch is attempting to fix.
I tested this patch using gcc 4.3.3, and while it produces a usable
image, it causes the size of the image to grow from 227K to 433K!
So perhaps we need a patch that uses a more restrictive wildcard.
Steve
Thanks for pointing this out, Steve. That'll go into V3 of my patch set I
guess, as Alexander's patch derives from mine and I most probably hit the
same size increase issue as he does.
Wolfgang: that may mean the tx25 config file patch is unneeded. Stay tuned.
I should have stated that I was using gcc 4.3.3 and binutils 2.18.50,
since indeed it does seem to be binutils related.
I have had a couple of reports that the following patch works with
recent gcc/binutils without increasing the size of the binary.
Could others check and report results?
Steve
ARMV7: Fix build issue with recent versions of gcc/binutils
---
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
index 88a0fec..e690b58 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ SECTIONS
}
. = ALIGN(4);
__rel_dyn_start = .;
- .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.dyn) }
+ .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.*) }
__rel_dyn_end = .;
__dynsym_start = .;
Weird... This patch seems indeed more restrictive than mine, but the
input sections collected in .rel.dyn are actually the same for both.
We can gain a bit less than 60k by overlapping .bss and .rel.dyn, but
certainly not 200k!
OTOH, it happened during my 'cross-build' tests (using one chain's gcc
with another chain's ld) that the resulting u-boot was drastically
reduced; but I chalked that to my misusing of the build tools.
Steve, can you indicate which toolchain excatly exhibits the
230k-to-430k issue, and which board I should build?
The problem is that the first patch posted here places .rel.dyn after
..bss, so when dumping u-boot.img, all of .bss is included in the file.
Keeping it before .bss allows the flat binary to omit .bss as usual.
Indeed, but that accounts only for about 60k, as I said. Steve talks
about a 200k delta; I can't find how this much can be added just by
moving the .rel.dyn section around.
The idea of having .text, .*data and .bss contiguous is that it will
reduce RAM footprint. In order to keep this and not increase FLASH/NAND
footprint, I think we can overlap .bss and .rel.dyn.
Using the patch quoted above, I get a working u-boot from all
combinations of gcc and binutils I cared to try, including gcc
4.5-linaro with binutils 2.20.1.
Thanks for the feedback.
Amicalement,
--
Albert.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
[U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
Signed-off-by: Alexander Holler hol...@ahsoftware.de
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds | 15 ---
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
index 88a0fec..34e0a79 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
@@ -54,13 +54,6 @@ SECTIONS
*(.data.rel.ro)
}
. = ALIGN(4);
- __rel_dyn_start = .;
- .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.dyn) }
- __rel_dyn_end = .;
-
- __dynsym_start = .;
- .dynsym : { *(.dynsym) }
-
__got_start = .;
. = ALIGN(4);
.got : { *(.got) }
@@ -74,4 +67,12 @@ SECTIONS
__bss_start = .;
.bss : { *(.bss) }
_end = .;
+
+ . = ALIGN(4);
+ __rel_dyn_start = .;
+ .rel.dyn : { *(.rel*) }
+ __rel_dyn_end = .;
+
+ __dynsym_start = .;
+ .dynsym : { *(.dynsym) }
}
--
1.7.2.2
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] armv7: fix linker file for newer ld support
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Alexander Holler hol...@ahsoftware.de wrote:
Signed-off-by: Alexander Holler hol...@ahsoftware.de
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds | 15 ---
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
index 88a0fec..34e0a79 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/u-boot.lds
@@ -54,13 +54,6 @@ SECTIONS
*(.data.rel.ro)
}
. = ALIGN(4);
- __rel_dyn_start = .;
- .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.dyn) }
- __rel_dyn_end = .;
-
- __dynsym_start = .;
- .dynsym : { *(.dynsym) }
-
__got_start = .;
. = ALIGN(4);
.got : { *(.got) }
@@ -74,4 +67,12 @@ SECTIONS
__bss_start = .;
.bss : { *(.bss) }
_end = .;
+
+ . = ALIGN(4);
+ __rel_dyn_start = .;
+ .rel.dyn : { *(.rel*) }
+ __rel_dyn_end = .;
+
+ __dynsym_start = .;
+ .dynsym : { *(.dynsym) }
}
--
I've been using gcc 4.3.3, so I haven't run into the issue that this
patch is attempting to fix.
I tested this patch using gcc 4.3.3, and while it produces a usable
image, it causes the size of the image to grow from 227K to 433K!
So perhaps we need a patch that uses a more restrictive wildcard.
Steve
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
