[uclibc-ng-devel] [ork1] issue with Binutils 2.32 and gcc 9.x

Romain Naour romain.naour at gmail.com
Fri Aug 23 17:23:12 CEST 2019

Hi Stafford,

Le 23/08/2019 à 15:47, Stafford Horne a écrit :
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 07:35:33PM +0200, Romain Naour wrote:
>> Hi Waldemar,
>> I discovered an issue with uClibc and binutils 2.32 and gcc 9.1 or 9.2.
> Hi Romain,
> Thank you for reporting and doing the initial investigation.  Sorry, I haven't
> built uclibc-ng for a while.

You're welcome, your help is very appreciated.
> Have you been able to make much progress?

Yes and no...

>> LD libuClibc-1.0.31.so
>> /opt/openrisc--uclibc--bleeding-edge-1/lib/gcc/or1k-buildroot-linux-uclibc/9.2.0/../../../../or1k-buildroot-linux-uclibc/bin/ld:
>> libc/libc_so.a(or1k_clone.os): pc-relative relocation against dynamic symbol
>> __syscall_error
>> See:
>> https://gitlab.com/kubu93/toolchains-builder/-/jobs/270854456
>> This error message come from a new check in binutils 2.32.x:
>> https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=f2c1801f6255a3f9f483ae2f07c7d7da0ddae4af
> Right, this patch added several new validations.  I am guessing the complaint is
> correct and we need to fix something in uclibc-ng.

No, I haven't found a solution yet.

sysdep.h was added by commit [1] that merge the clone() code from the glibc fork
for or1k [2].

For now I disabled uClibc for or1k when building with gcc 9.x [3].




>> With binutils 2.30.x and 2.31.x, I have another assembler error:
>> Error: junk at end of line `l.movhi r17,gotoffha(.LC0)'
>> ork1 support was added to gcc 9.x and enabled into Buildroot recently.
>> https://git.buildroot.net/buildroot/commit/?id=da70a55a1955ff673e0110bacb3daef50f21b29e
> The above error comes because we need binutils 2.32.x with the new toolchain.

Indeed, I figured out that binutils >= 2.32 was mandatory to use gcc 9.1 [4].


>> I remember doing a test with qemu_or1k_defconfig before gcc 9.1 was released but
>> I don't remember if it was with musl or uClibc-ng... It should be with uClibc-ng
>> but I didn't trigged such error.
>> Thoughts ?
> It's likely the new validations added with binutils 2.32.x.  I'll try to build
> uclibc-ng and see if I can reproduce.

You can reproduce easily by using Buildroot from master branch and reverting the
patch [3]. I runtime tested the new or1k toolchain using musl libc by using the
Buildroot defconfig qemu_or1k_defconfig.

Best regards,

> -Stafford

More information about the devel mailing list