[U-Boot-Users] software FP yada yada yada

[Ulf Samuelsson]

> In message <131AF8573CF31945B5B11E4201D3F1E142BA28 at mail3.Avidyne.com> you wrote:
>> 
>> When I got 1.1.4, I get the infamous message about how u-boot needs a
>> software FP whereas my gcc is set up for hardware fp.
>> 
>> What I would LIKE to know is why 1.1.2 builds just fine but 1.1.4 does
>> not.
> 
> There have been so many changes between 1.1.2  and  1.1.4  that  it's
> difficult  to  tell  which specific change causes the problem, but if
> you check the "make" output you can clearly see where the problem  is
> coming  from  - your compiler fails to provide the required softfloat
> routines. Which is kind of funny, since there are  not  so  many  ARM
> systems with FPU around.
> 

According to the crosstool documentation at www.kegel.com:

Most combinations of gcc 3.x.x and binutils fails when you try to build a softfloat toolchain
All tested combinations of gcc-4.x.x and binutils fails if softfloat is enabled.
If you want to use gcc 4, you cannot build u-boot as is.

> My recommendation is to fix the toolchain

IIRC, An file included by the top makefile defines CFLAGS to include -msoftfloat.
Removing -msoftfloat from CFLAGS allows you to build U-boot with your normal compiler.
I did that, and u-boot 1.1.4 compiled fine after that. 

Personally, I think -msoftfloat should be optional.
Before Wolfgang start complaining about bloat, I'd like to point
out that due to segment boundaries in the AT45DB642D
a total of 256 kB is av ailable for the dataflashboot, u.boot and
u-boot environment and it is meaningless to save a byte here and there.

It is worth 10s of kB to be able to use a single toolchain to build
u-.boot, Linux and filesystem
.

> Best regards,
> 
> Wolfgang Denk
> 
> -- 


Best Regards
Ulf Samuelsson