On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 08:47:47PM +0000, Alistair Delva wrote: > The LLVM toolchain does not have or need libgcc, so do not require > it to exist on the library path. Even if "-print-libgcc-file-name" > returned the empty string, -lgcc would be specified. > > This leaves CONFIG_USE_PRIVATE_LIBGCC alone because I did not have > a target/toolchain combination available for testing. > > Signed-off-by: Alistair Delva <ade...@google.com> > Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > Cc: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> > Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulni...@google.com> > --- > Makefile | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > index 8af67ebd63..af06b7aa19 100644 > --- a/Makefile > +++ b/Makefile > @@ -874,8 +874,10 @@ u-boot-main := $(libs-y) > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_PRIVATE_LIBGCC),y) > PLATFORM_LIBGCC = arch/$(ARCH)/lib/lib.a > else > +ifneq ($(cc-name),clang) > PLATFORM_LIBGCC := -L $(shell dirname `$(CC) $(c_flags) > -print-libgcc-file-name`) -lgcc > endif > +endif > PLATFORM_LIBS += $(PLATFORM_LIBGCC) > > ifdef CONFIG_CC_COVERAGE
So this one isn't quite right, and will result in some platforms / architectures just failing to build as the handful of functions we get provided by CONFIG_USE_PRIVATE_LIBGCC end up being missing. It's also the case that this is a badly named option, and something we really should figure out how to remove and then always provide the required functions for. What configuration did you end up having this problem on exactly? -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
