Opened on 11/18/15 at 22:37:52
Last modified on 02/15/17 at 13:37:51
#2473 assigned defect
mvme162 has invalid code in start up
Reported by: | Eric Williams | Owned by: | Needs Funding |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | high | Milestone: | Indefinite |
Component: | bsps | Version: | 4.11 |
Severity: | blocker | Keywords: | bsp m68k |
Cc: | Blocked By: | ||
Blocking: |
Change History (6)
comment:1 Changed on 11/18/15 at 22:54:59 by Chris Johns
comment:2 Changed on 11/19/15 at 00:14:48 by Joel Sherrill
The very prompt response from the gcc community is this is expected behaviour when writing to 0 on the target. The -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks option disables the check.
I am happy to have our code built with this option because we should not be writing to 0 unless it is a special case such as setting up the vector table.
I am now wondering about the state of our other BSPs.
Given this was the response on #2204. Should this option be swept into all m68k BSPs? Or should it be added in a place (not sure offhand of the spot) where it will apply to all targets and BSPs?
I am prone to say we need to do this for 4.11. It likely breaks every BSP on any architecture which touches memory at 0.
comment:3 Changed on 11/19/15 at 01:02:10 by Chris Johns
I did not add the option and fixed the BSP as per the commit that closes the ticket. I suggest we fix the m68k BSPs.
comment:4 Changed on 11/19/15 at 15:18:39 by Joel Sherrill
OK. Is there any easy way to identify the BSPs impacted? It would be nice to have a master list to work through.
comment:5 Changed on 01/26/17 at 07:16:00 by Sebastian Huber
Milestone: | 4.11.1 → 4.11.2 |
---|
comment:6 Changed on 02/15/17 at 13:37:51 by Sebastian Huber
Milestone: | 4.11.2 → Indefinite |
---|---|
Owner: | changed from Chris Johns to Needs Funding |
Status: | new → assigned |
Thanks Eric.
Is this important for 4.11?