From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/9458 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Masanori Ogino Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general,gmane.comp.hardware.lowrisc.devel Subject: Re: Interest in "Porting musl libc to RISC-V" project for GSoC 2016 Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 09:54:44 +0900 Message-ID: References: <20160303220641.GL29662@port70.net> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457052901 7763 80.91.229.3 (4 Mar 2016 00:55:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 00:55:01 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com, lowrisc-dev@lists.lowrisc.org Original-X-From: musl-return-9471-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Fri Mar 04 01:55:00 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1abe1D-0003Kw-QB for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Fri, 04 Mar 2016 01:54:59 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 7882 invoked by uid 550); 4 Mar 2016 00:54:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 7857 invoked from network); 4 Mar 2016 00:54:56 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to; bh=iS1FISaF77sIemrzQADZ2jI3n+jCGEQQmceql+Bk0A4=; b=s68lVAhkgE7SfjBtQ6RowuB8+KgD0LlK6RkR2YlF7AGVi/sacX+ZI+PDYtmOX7Gqpx bnbWzRWWtpmkDIgOjuPrNz4l2NNCA8dbe6582WguLM2W0If3o3h/rCBkFTtYG6N9WwKy wqtV1PpaqzoIDeTsgMhJMdMawwc1VXO7sTePOZhDOYP/RJmNeThu728SeveVQ2+tv5FE Q5KpwTlYsrocyPZP/RXNupvocOCPBCg4y1AItrjEGR2jrca3lUEoDDzNsrub9OO4OmJA Hdn5v4VRQHyOc4jUni11XpJB1dhfvA7/GG4X0xQYffua6L/zG1tEE7SUfu2L5hyjFkV0 IYeQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to; bh=iS1FISaF77sIemrzQADZ2jI3n+jCGEQQmceql+Bk0A4=; b=enMkSZvjhLblrlRsHEtCyjFU+Na2lDhkcceCrwIhn7KH7PbjHUGgMr4AEtG6wtUltP LZH4V+CD8IQbfCEtv3kk+c4karoX3391C2y5qwdyu4IzlY5N8bRlb86FexfekjRb5KPk kpB9Rrj4F1VSgXyoNAjwaxLmZ5n6KBhOzc3uLUIg/WQNq6BIDdVaLD46iPvX81dW5tN0 ezXU14DfPB3Ds6i7IdEnbaXNBaDOBpm+wyP+8Ham4gATzwQX57NY0JPlIiL9E4dLUmb5 0/Ew5H2MSlNyxRPWzZwUzTYwzkUfoYwY25HBnMzJdKT/+5IFRjZYTpyAUrRgidw9YXM1 8rQw== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJK1NuDEFmRDql6gl1gLUiBHCd8zn9WxXvVJV6mvqUSipzxIqtOYOl2qDLtqT04Iha478ouaUsmKFVaGDA== X-Received: by 10.50.23.80 with SMTP id k16mr739594igf.81.1457052884269; Thu, 03 Mar 2016 16:54:44 -0800 (PST) Original-Sender: masanoriogino@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20160303220641.GL29662@port70.net> X-Google-Sender-Auth: DdjBJDdgpIEuU9uc2vLmfSm_CGE Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:9458 gmane.comp.hardware.lowrisc.devel:296 Archived-At: Hello, 2016-03-04 7:06 GMT+09:00 Szabolcs Nagy : > last time iirc musl port was considered to be > not large enough in itself for a gsoc project > (i think it should not take more than 2 months > but i don't know the current state of risc-v > qemu/linux/gcc/etc) > > you might need to think additional things to work on. > > for musl, one idea is to invest extra time on testing. > > for risc-v i think polishing the toolchain and the docs > would be useful. Agreed. > there are some basic problems with the risc-v software > eco-system: > > there is no proper sysv psabi spec. (designing one would > have been better than copying obsolete nonsense from mips > as i can see in the glibc port.) Hmm, ABI is an important factor for the proposal, but I probably won't have enough time to invent a new ABI and implement it during this summer... Anyway, would you give me any well-designed psABI (or non-SysV-psABI) examples? > nothing is upstream yet (gcc/linux/.. ports are > maintained out of tree, working with the upstream > community is important for many reasons). Agreed with the importance of merging to upstream. > risc-v mailing lists are not public, only subscribers > can see or participate in the discussions. (this is > bad given that there are no specs, no upstreamed code > so no source of information for outsiders.) I think it would be great if archives are public. I don't know the reason why the project decide to do so. > for a musl port this means that we don't have abi > stability guarantees, the port can stop working with > the rest of the risc-v software stack. so for a > successful port i think some scripts should be developed > to build and test the latest risc-v things against musl > (cross-toolchain, rootfs, etc) so we can keep it working. Indeed it's great to have an automated testing infrastructure. I really love CI. Thank you for your suggestion! -- Masanori Ogino