From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 238EBE00E9D; Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (armccurdy[at]gmail.com) * -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no * trust * [209.85.213.48 listed in list.dnswl.org] * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Received: from mail-vk0-f48.google.com (mail-vk0-f48.google.com [209.85.213.48]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F338E009CF for ; Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vk0-f48.google.com with SMTP id u8-v6so1528394vku.5 for ; Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=p8MlRLnT5296ZiE07T4d/8wNbb0/X/DWLS9EqbJLtBo=; b=ciUZtvLz2GCItdzqs0yIyQfQ6Wa7JT4ULw7ku38A3KrejOIpzZ8k1KAuZgKlsfRj1j j0SZ34wS4KU/5U5OZw7juVOfo8yJfS21jd++1s+QEufxipH9XSuOsdX3g/Dbvm7ZRDxR bqmlCFxkoYr1IYjqwsxa2LLElGefkKgqyheoXed58RQ3ZB47WNvAOtrxErDGmY9qObLt 8r+xugqoqaxnZaE6LbGi8kxd/PNQ0f/UFcOuHQuVEZPWQxuFsDPN4bZpntgCwyngZQFE Ojo553Hi3p/NiFNrz0D760BUHfR75FhX63UNb7Wv9q/F2nKwYde/kjZRL5CR8Z3M/4Ue 7+sg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=p8MlRLnT5296ZiE07T4d/8wNbb0/X/DWLS9EqbJLtBo=; b=E8MlyIAY8DhFeYcy3+2lPMHPAvnieJsVaxETQ7pABHCI49cVfQBejyb/NZ/auE+alg izINdwTsQ8ERLSMPvineGJRZItJUE65Elmc/Q9fWLieuDrvXUkVxgDvu3bTM+RvlYe+u c1Y8mkDenbO32qItc4iC1jLoS24++IoJDhB9oABJ4JgLlolum+NNdiBQO6duSD20eUaT j1dvl7G03W7ZMaibGl7+miAe4NTrMrpWFihDbCjRrC6tDnuu7wuEdRBqEBlHvJAH+V5z qkIfFNFBwvft6yTPi5ytb7/gWQGkFZadDVo4fZXCP9srXCRQf/qH1kZ04FetVu04+A9o fxPA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwe+i+0Wf1cImnzJmLSexBDx3S00o/0wQmtJ6hIGV+YGAs7CdNSI e9SNo/6AjQTwV7MnYiY16NtbqatAZG/odgC+UaI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZoFbcKK4nowkzqX8z6WVX9DzFbjaaoD+MHwHnAgUgnXdiCptiYxlvI/uS9715IgQ0/5t6cdmHFYvuQ/mwlAwlg= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:ac2:: with SMTP id 185-v6mr2521591vkk.194.1526000407166; Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.48.148 with HTTP; Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <8d962430-ac63-5e97-fd32-2c0464c62acb@gmail.com> <20180510191145.GA1954@jama> <20180510214325.GC1954@jama> <20180510220735.GD1954@jama> <20180510225017.GE1954@jama> From: Andre McCurdy Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:06 -0700 Message-ID: To: Khem Raj Cc: Yocto Project , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer , openembedded-devel Subject: Re: [OE-core] [RFT] GCC 8.1 X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 01:00:09 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:55 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andre McCurdy wrote: >> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 3:50 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: >>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:40:53PM -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: >>>> > see >>>> > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2018-May/150654.html >>>> >>>> Removing -fno-omit-frame-pointer isn't the same as adding >>>> -fomit-frame-pointer. Frame pointers may get enabled depending on the >>>> optimisation level etc (ie not only by -fno-omit-frame-pointer). >>> >>> Should I send v2 adding -fomit-frame-pointer instead of removing >>> -fno-omit-frame-pointer? >>> >>> The v1 fixes the issue for me with default config + DEBUG_BUILD. >> >> The v1 patch isn't wrong, it's just incomplete (the problem could come >> back if someone changes optimisation level or switches gcc to clang, >> etc). >> >> My choice would be a v2 patch which adds -fomit-frame-pointer to >> CFLAGS unconditionally for all ARM builds when Thumb is enabled. That >> should fix the problem for all optimisation levels etc and avoids >> building the main strace binary differently depending on whether or >> not ptest is enabled. > > explicitly adding this option is a poor choice especially for debug > builds where we should > let the -On level decide and not explicitly ask for either > enable/disable frame-pointers > that will also make it compiler proof. Of course, we should let the compiler decide whenever it's possible to do so. Unfortunately there are cases like this one where frame pointers clash with inline assembler and we need to over-rule the compiler's choice. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-vk0-f54.google.com (mail-vk0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9629575414; Fri, 11 May 2018 01:00:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk0-f54.google.com with SMTP id i190-v6so2314035vkd.13; Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=p8MlRLnT5296ZiE07T4d/8wNbb0/X/DWLS9EqbJLtBo=; b=ciUZtvLz2GCItdzqs0yIyQfQ6Wa7JT4ULw7ku38A3KrejOIpzZ8k1KAuZgKlsfRj1j j0SZ34wS4KU/5U5OZw7juVOfo8yJfS21jd++1s+QEufxipH9XSuOsdX3g/Dbvm7ZRDxR bqmlCFxkoYr1IYjqwsxa2LLElGefkKgqyheoXed58RQ3ZB47WNvAOtrxErDGmY9qObLt 8r+xugqoqaxnZaE6LbGi8kxd/PNQ0f/UFcOuHQuVEZPWQxuFsDPN4bZpntgCwyngZQFE Ojo553Hi3p/NiFNrz0D760BUHfR75FhX63UNb7Wv9q/F2nKwYde/kjZRL5CR8Z3M/4Ue 7+sg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=p8MlRLnT5296ZiE07T4d/8wNbb0/X/DWLS9EqbJLtBo=; b=MUhKwLBF3qht4LD/q4JESK8NUQ2kETlN5+iNHNRIR2hzTPVx7N/NlJM6FjIwQI99S7 gLmm5ryXMX3taXg+Kmd3i8FDFvYb993q06Vwt1xgsw07wnCxNU+IXMYc2yPkN20zQEnL KJPe5qhpm41GY2/6EE1136uz/sF+eulg9x3hHgf71YckIJLhg0n//3J9Obqo4LpB4bU2 xfltsb9MCsYbszT7dsSVdNFVqM/0GlK3thBo9lfp2cD3ZLktjoh37yLilqc5UMmPxq8h l2IaVp36+hKfbuY4oSRs8PGTIChY98OeupHguutkXr/8Mb8H7hEY7JItvNmplV8wPMql pNgA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwdd2Saf14hvBaNZILyVrpo0Pjq7enWk1bCubn2n35R0SI2avi08 lV7IqyhORkOuAW82bSqaxWGsbToylt97CBMkKig= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZoFbcKK4nowkzqX8z6WVX9DzFbjaaoD+MHwHnAgUgnXdiCptiYxlvI/uS9715IgQ0/5t6cdmHFYvuQ/mwlAwlg= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:ac2:: with SMTP id 185-v6mr2521591vkk.194.1526000407166; Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.48.148 with HTTP; Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <8d962430-ac63-5e97-fd32-2c0464c62acb@gmail.com> <20180510191145.GA1954@jama> <20180510214325.GC1954@jama> <20180510220735.GD1954@jama> <20180510225017.GE1954@jama> From: Andre McCurdy Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 18:00:06 -0700 Message-ID: To: Khem Raj Cc: Yocto Project , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer , openembedded-devel Subject: Re: [RFT] GCC 8.1 X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 01:00:07 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:55 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 4:11 PM, Andre McCurdy wrote: >> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 3:50 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: >>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 03:40:53PM -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: >>>> > see >>>> > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2018-May/150654.html >>>> >>>> Removing -fno-omit-frame-pointer isn't the same as adding >>>> -fomit-frame-pointer. Frame pointers may get enabled depending on the >>>> optimisation level etc (ie not only by -fno-omit-frame-pointer). >>> >>> Should I send v2 adding -fomit-frame-pointer instead of removing >>> -fno-omit-frame-pointer? >>> >>> The v1 fixes the issue for me with default config + DEBUG_BUILD. >> >> The v1 patch isn't wrong, it's just incomplete (the problem could come >> back if someone changes optimisation level or switches gcc to clang, >> etc). >> >> My choice would be a v2 patch which adds -fomit-frame-pointer to >> CFLAGS unconditionally for all ARM builds when Thumb is enabled. That >> should fix the problem for all optimisation levels etc and avoids >> building the main strace binary differently depending on whether or >> not ptest is enabled. > > explicitly adding this option is a poor choice especially for debug > builds where we should > let the -On level decide and not explicitly ask for either > enable/disable frame-pointers > that will also make it compiler proof. Of course, we should let the compiler decide whenever it's possible to do so. Unfortunately there are cases like this one where frame pointers clash with inline assembler and we need to over-rule the compiler's choice.