RTAI 3.2 and new binutils

[J.D. Yamokoski]

You might be right that binutils is not the culprit. But is the fix just 
a matter of doing a few find/replace's on "mov" in the RTAI code? That's 
what seemed to fix the kernel problems. For instance, before applying 
linux-2.6-seg-5.patch 
<http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/linux-2.6-seg-5.patch> I 
got the following errors:

CC arch/i386/kernel/process.o
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:880: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `mov'
....
{standard input}:1324: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `mov'
make[1]: *** [arch/i386/kernel/process.o] Error 1
make: *** [arch/i386/kernel] Error 2

After applying the patch, no more problems. 99% of that patch is the 
following:

-    asm volatile("movl %%fs,%0":"=m" (*(int *)&prev->fs));
-    asm volatile("movl %%gs,%0":"=m" (*(int *)&prev->gs));
+    asm volatile("mov %%fs,%0":"=m" (prev->fs));
+    asm volatile("mov %%gs,%0":"=m" (prev->gs));

Now however, I get the same error signature in the RTAI code:

CC adeos/x86.o
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:401: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `mov'
....
{standard input}:1418: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `mov'
make[1]: *** [adeos/x86.o] Error 1
make: *** [adeos] Error 2


J.D. Yamokoski


Hannes Mayer wrote:
> J.D. Yamokoski wrote:
>> I posted a message to the list just a few days ago regarding this 
>> same problem. I was getting mov compile errors in RTAI code. I was 
>> getting them in the linux kernel as well until found the same patches 
>> you reference. Unfortunately, the responses I got to my post were 
>> simply, "RTAI does not support GCC4, try recompiling with GCC3.2" - 
>> which does not address the problem whatsoever.
>
> Ok, it does not address your problem, but compiling with GCC3.3.x most
> likely avoids other issues.
>
> I just checked the latest binutils version:
> It is 2.16.1, right ?
> I checked my development machine (debian sarge):
> # ld --version
> GNU ld version 2.16.1 Debian GNU/Linux
>
> Since I haven't seen such errors like you do, I'm guessing, but maybe
> binutils isn't the problem here.
>
> Best regards,
> Hannes.
>