From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2349 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: musl 0.9.8 released Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 08:05:07 -0500 Message-ID: <20121128130507.GP20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20121127024958.GA23123@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20121127184329.a20d1160.idunham@lavabit.com> <20121128033948.GO20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20121127205116.1dbf130f.idunham@lavabit.com> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1354107938 31843 80.91.229.3 (28 Nov 2012 13:05:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:05:38 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-2350-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Nov 28 14:05:49 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TdhKm-0006sQ-KI for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 14:05:48 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 25951 invoked by uid 550); 28 Nov 2012 13:05:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 25921 invoked from network); 28 Nov 2012 13:05:19 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121127205116.1dbf130f.idunham@lavabit.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2349 Archived-At: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 08:51:16PM -0800, Isaac Dunham wrote: > > > -planned subarches: mipsel32-sf, mips32-sf > > > > My idea for the names would be something like: mips, mipsel, mips-sf, > > mipsel-sf, ... > > > Basically, the full arch name would be something along the lines of: > > > > arch[el|eb][-abivariant] > > > > which could be represented as $(ARCH)$(ENDIAN)$(ABIVARIANT), where > > only $(ARCH)$(ABIVARIANT) and $(ARCH) should be needed to search for > > asm files. But additional considerations need to be made for how the > > main arch dir with bits headers and internal headers would be > > selected. I don't think we want to duplicate entire arch trees for > > subarchs, but I also don't see how subarchs can get by with using the > > same set of headers unless we rely on the compiler to predefine macros > > that distinguish them. This is rather ugly but we're already partially > > relying on it for endianness varants. > > Where would the headers need to differ by subarch? > I'm guessing this is mainly stuff like fenv? Yes, probably the floating-point headers are the main places: fenv.h, float.h, and math.h. > > > -unsupported subarches: i386 > > > > ?? > The 80386 processor, as opposed to 80486. > > # On x86, make sure we don't have incompatible instruction set > # extensions enabled by default. This is bad for making static binaries. > # We cheat and use i486 rather than i386 because i386 really does not > # work anyway (issues with atomic ops). This is fairly comparable to the mips1 issue and the need for ll/sc emulation by the kernel. i386 is just fundamentally lacking in a way that makes multi-tasking/multi-threading not workable with the POSIX apis for it. The kernel should be emulating 'lock cmpxchg', like it does ll/sc for mips1, and if it did, 386 would work fine. But apparently nobody cares anyway.. > Also, I can't seem to find it now, but somewhere I heard that > upstream gcc and/or glibc with the "i386-linux-*" triplet has some > incompatability with "i486-linux-*". IIRC, I heard that some distros > patch this to treat i386-linux-* as if it meant i486. > But, I can't trace the source for that claim, so don't count on it... This doesn't make any sense to me. > > > It seems Debian's using aarch64-* for ARMv8. > > > > Yes, 64-bit arm is a new arch and it seems they used the name aarch64 > > instead of arm64 due to arm* being interpreted as 32-bit arm by many > > things.. > > > ie, due to the insane number of ABIs and triplets that ARM has? > arm (bigendian/OABI), armeabi (bigendian: armeb), armel > (littleendian variant of EABI), armhf (armel + vfp3) :-) Rich