Re: Thinking about release

[Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>]

On 07/10/2013 02:42:34 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 09:28:21AM +1200, Andre Renaud wrote:
> > >> Does anyone have any comments on the suitability of this code,  
> or what
> > >
> > > If nothing else, it fails to be armv4 compatible. Fixing that  
> should
> > > not be hard, but it would require a bit of an audit. The return
> > > sequences are the obvious issue, but there may be other  
> instructions
> > > in use that are not available on armv4 or maybe not even on  
> armv5...?
> >
> > Rob Landley mentioned a while ago that armv4 has issues with the  
> EABI
> > stuff. Is armv4 a definite lower bound for musl support, as opposed  
> to
> > armv4t or armv5?
> 
> EABI specifies thumb; however, it's possible to have code which
> conforms fully to EABI but does not rely on the presence of thumb. GCC
> is incapable of generating such code, but it could be enhanced to do
> so, and all of the existing assembly in musl is plain-v4-compatible,
> so I would prefer not to shut out the possibility of supporting older
> ARM.

One of my larger pending todo items for aboriginal is fishing the last  
gplv2 release out of gcc git the same way I did for binutils. (In  
theory, this should give me armv7l support. In practice, the mpfr and  
gmp split complicates matters...)

If somebody wanted to come up with an armv4-eabi patch, I'd happily  
include it. Or just give me rather a lot of hints on what would be  
involved, since I'm not much of an arm assembly programmer...

Rob