From: Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com>
To: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>,
        "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arc: Remove sometimes misleading toolchain check
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] arc: Remove sometimes misleading toolchain check
Thread-Index: AQHS1Xu6J/Qgfq3Xykqz8m3xQdWCeqIZizKAgAAAjIA=
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 16:35:50 +0000
Message-ID: <1496853349.18628.35.camel@synopsys.com>
References: <1495733045-18736-1-git-send-email-abrodkin@synopsys.com>
         <09e88740-9aa5-0526-abc3-9374fc9af5e9@synopsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <09e88740-9aa5-0526-abc3-9374fc9af5e9@synopsys.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, ru-RU
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <8DFE41838AC3C8429EBD350BF01C07A5@internal.synopsys.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 1627
Lines: 35

Hi Vineet,

On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 09:33 -0700, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> On 05/25/2017 10:24 AM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> > 
> > Thinking of a toolchains for ARCompact and ARCv2 ISAs we implicitly
> > think about libgcc.a build for one of those ISAs which we're linking
> > with. And given there's no multiarch uClibc toolchain for ARC
> > (as probably for any other architecture) the assumption is the only way
> > to get libgcc.a for desired ISA is from a toolchain built right for that
> > same ISA.
> > 
> > So what we do we check what's GCC's default architecture ARC700 or not.
> > But generally speaking default arch makes not a lot of sense if explicit
> > command line option exist like "-mcpu=archs". In other words exactly the
> > same GCC might build executables for both ARC700 and ARC HS38.
> > 
> > But in real life libgcc could be easily built on a separate step
> > independently of the compiler and friends. And that really happens.
> > 
> > For example OpenEmbedded prefers to reuse the same toolchain for both
> > arches having libgcc built separately.
> 
> So this is a goodness of OE. But unfortunately those of living with simpler build 
> systems: Synopsys toolchain scripts or even Buildroot don't have this - right ?
> 
> So how will it help other developers avoid errors in the work flow when doing 
> kernel builds for ARCompact and ARCv2.
> 
> The right solution is to kill off the libgcc dependency altogether form kernel. 
> Just import math emulation code that we think is needed and build it in kernel !

Right and that's on my todo list as I'm suffering the most from this issue now :)

-Alexey