[U-Boot] U-Boot Bug with newer GCC

[Jeroen Hofstee]

Hello Heiko,

On 02/02/2013 11:18 AM, Jeroen Hofstee wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 02/02/2013 09:37 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> Hello Wolfgang, Sebastian,
>>
>> On 01.02.2013 12:31, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>> In message 
>>> <E70AF999396FDF4EAE40E195B847096109F5D3A9 at SRVEXCH-2K10.CADCON.INTERN> you 
>>> wrote:
>>>> we are using u-boot in our embedded system with arm-1136jfs cpu.
>>> Which exact system / board configuration is this?
>>>
>>> And which exact U-Boot version (git commit ID ?) is it?
>>>
>>>> We recently tried a new toolchain with GCC 4.7.2.
>>>> If compiled with the new toolchain the feature CONFIG_AUTO_COMPLETE 
>>>> isn't working.
>>> We have been using GCC 4.7.2 for several months now, on many systems.
>>> No such problems have been reported before, so I speculate if this is
>>> really a problem with mainline code?
>> Sebastian wrote On 01.02.2013 08:55:
>>> we are using u-boot in our embedded system with arm-1136jfs cpu.
>>> We recently tried a new toolchain with GCC 4.7.2.
>>> If compiled with the new toolchain the feature CONFIG_AUTO_COMPLETE 
>>> isn't working.
>>> U-Boot start normally and on hitting TAB the system freezes.
>>> I tracked the problem down the variables __u_boot_cmd_start and 
>>> __u_boot_cmd_end. Both are not valid with the new toolchain. And 
>>> accessing one results in a system freeze.
>>> Probably the is a problem in arch/arm/cpu/u-boot.lds. I really bad 
>>> at linker scripts.
>> I just see some problems with ll_entry_* functions described in my
>> post here:
>> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2013-February/145711.html
>>
>> I do not know, if this is the same problem, as I face problems only
>> before relocation, after relocation all works fine ...
>>
>> In this thread Marek wrote, that for this problem albert has
>> a solution ... (CCed albert and marek)
>>
>> Albert? Can you help here?
> I am tempted to think that is unrelated. First of all since you encounter
> problems with the 4.6 toolchain. This trap is not present when
> compiling with a 4.6 version (at least not for me).
>
> Second, because I bothered Marex and Albert already with this
> problem on irc and they concluded it could not be ll related.
>
> Third, because dumping the array of commands to a console,
> displays them all correctly.

For completeness, the third statement is wrong. It is only the case
for the working version, the table has incorrect values for
cmdtp->name in current master. So lets hope it is the same problem.
I will wait for Albert his patch and check again. Thanks for the pointer.

Regards,
Jeroen