Bug #5081: simtrace2 doesn't build for ubuntu 20.04 and 20.10 and debian9 - SIMtrace 2 - Open Source Mobile Communications

Actions

Copy link

#1

Updated by osmith about 3 years ago

Related to Bug #4687: simtrace2 dpkg fails to build on Ubuntu 20.04 added

Actions

Copy link

#2

Updated by osmith about 3 years ago

Subject changed from simtrace2 doesn't build for ubuntu 20.04 and 20.10 to simtrace2 doesn't build for ubuntu 20.04 and 20.10 and debian9

It also started failing on Debian 9, and this in-turn causes the Osmocom-repo-install-debian9 jenkins job to fail.

[  108s] [COMPILING ./atmel_softpack_libraries/usb/device/dfu/dfu_driver.c]
[  108s] Memory region         Used Size  Region Size  %age Used
[  108s]              rom:       16400 B        16 KB    100.10%
[  108s]              ram:       11688 B        48 KB     23.78/usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/5.4.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  108s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/5.4.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  109s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/5.4.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: bin/qmod-dfu-flash.elf section `.text' will not fit in region `rom'
[  109s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/5.4.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  109s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/5.4.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  109s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/5.4.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  109s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/5.4.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: region `rom' overflowed by 16 bytes
[  109s] collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

On Debian 10, where it succeeds, it's also pretty close. I guess the newer GCC version used in debian 10 is a bit more efficient.

[  149s] [COMPILING ./atmel_softpack_libraries/usb/device/dfu/dfu_driver.c]
[  149s] Memory region         Used Size  Region Size  %age Used
[  149s]              rom:       16328 B        16 KB     99.66%
[  149s]              ram:       11688 B        48 KB     23.78/usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/7.3.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  149s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/7.3.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  149s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/7.3.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  149s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/7.3.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes
[  149s] /usr/lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/7.3.1/../../../arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: warning: changing start of section .stack by 4 bytes

laforge, mschramm: I wonder if we can simply increase the rom region for dfu_driver.c, and take some from, e.g. usb.c:

[  136s] [COMPILING libcommon/source/usb.c]
[  136s] Memory region         Used Size  Region Size  %age Used
[  136s]              rom:       25524 B       240 KB     10.39%
[  136s]              ram:       24832 B        48 KB     50.52%

Build logs:

Actions

Copy link

#3

Updated by mschramm about 3 years ago

osmith wrote:

laforge, mschramm: I wonder if we can simply increase the rom region for dfu_driver.c, and take some from, e.g. usb.c:

Can't tell, instead added Hoernchen as watcher. ,)

Actions

Copy link

#4

Updated by laforge about 3 years ago

On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 02:28:56PM +0000, redmine@lists.osmocom.org wrote:

laforge, mschramm: I wonder if we can simply increase the rom region for dfu_driver.c, and take some from, e.g. usb.c:

no, that would render the flash layout incompatible, which is a nightmare
to support, and it would also mean we'd have to maintain builds for old and new
flash layout, and people will brick their devices all over the place.

Actions

Copy link

#5

Updated by Hoernchen about 3 years ago

I've had to prune strings to make it fit a year ago, and as the related ticket points out selectively disabling useless compiler options is apparently not possible, so I don't really see any great options here?
I suppose some dfu code parts can be removed after my patch to reset itself was introduced two months ago.

Actions

Copy link

#6