[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/5] package/gcc: add support for gcc 10
romain.naour at gmail.com
Wed Jun 24 20:38:59 UTC 2020
Le 24/06/2020 à 21:55, Thomas Petazzoni a écrit :
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 00:13:44 +0200
> Romain Naour <romain.naour at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Keep the same patch as for gcc 9.x fixing a parallel build issue:
>> Keep libzstd support disabled for now, it could be used to LTO bytecode.
> "... it could be used for LTO bytecode compression", otherwise it
> doesn't make a lot of sense.
> I've applied, but I have some comments/questions below.
>> +config BR2_GCC_VERSION_10_X
>> + bool "gcc 10.x"
>> + # or1k needs binutils >= 2.32
>> + depends on !(BR2_or1k && BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_31_X)
> Why are we doing this here, instead of in the binutils package ? This
> looks strange.
This dependency was added by  when we had a gcc 5 fork for or1k.
It here because it's gcc that require a recent enough binutils version.
Maybe we should consider adding BR2_TOOLCHAIN_BINUTILS_AT_LEAST_xxxx.
I think we already have a problem with new cpu variant that require the latest
>> + # powerpc spe support has been deprecated since gcc 8.x.
>> + # https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-04/msg00102.html
>> + depends on !BR2_powerpc_SPE
> Should we now drop support for PowerPC SPE ?
If every body is ok, then we can drop it.
>> + # C-SKY sk610 needs abiv1, which is not supported in
>> + # upstream gcc. C-SKY gcc upstream support not tested
>> + # with upstream binutils and glibc.
>> + depends on !BR2_csky
> We haven't had any news/contribution for C-SKY people for quite a
> while. I know in recent SoC they have used RISC-V cores, but they were
> supposed to continue making C-SKY based SoCs. I am fearing that this
> looks like yet another abandoned CPU architecture :-/
I'm not sure about this, their gitlab is still active:
IIRC we had some news from Guo Ren about the upstream qemu support for csky cpus
> Best regards,
More information about the buildroot