Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:35:00 +0200 From: Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> To: Mark Millard <markmi@dsl-only.net> Cc: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Next up on creating armv7 MACHINE_ARCH: pre FCP stage Message-ID: <290f9213ac2b227442c68cb0e3f7fdd5@megadrive.org> In-Reply-To: <FC393FFD-7461-40C6-9282-076016A2C567@dsl-only.net> References: <CANCZdfqw4dwkrMtNO9zpdnuXkrmVrWf_M4Odcn5MY%2B0jz7h_dA@mail.gmail.com> <C0FEFDC3-A873-4110-928A-E534D3FB5FE7@dsl-only.net> <6EC26472-CE31-4B14-A049-3F153E590647@dsl-only.net> <20170615145107.97e6460fbb6222b258bfd614@bidouilliste.com> <FC393FFD-7461-40C6-9282-076016A2C567@dsl-only.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2017-06-15 17:40, Mark Millard wrote: > On 2017-Jun-15, at 5:51 AM, Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> > wrote: > >> On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 02:08:10 -0700 >> Mark Millard <markmi@dsl-only.net> wrote: >> >>> On 2017-Jun-14, at 11:20 PM, Mark Millard <markmi at dsl-only.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2017-Jun-14, at 10:22 PM, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> . . . >>>>> Comments? >>>> >>>> I booted Ubuntu Mate on a BPI-M3 and tried: >>>> >>>> $ uname -p >>>> armv7l >>>> >>>> $ uname -ap >>>> Linux bpi-iot-ros-ai 3.4.39-BPI-M3-Kernel #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 3 >>>> 13:47:01 UTC 2016 armv7l armv7l armv7l GNU/Linux >>>> >>>> I was actually thinking that a "hf" might >>>> show up in how they name things if it was >>>> a hard float based build. But looking I >>>> see in /lib/ : >>>> >>>> . . . >>>> drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 16384 Nov 4 2016 arm-linux-gnueabihf >>>> . . . >>>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 30 Oct 14 2016 ld-linux-armhf.so.3 -> >>>> arm-linux-gnueabihf/ld-2.23.so >>>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Apr 21 2016 ld-linux.so.3 -> >>>> /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3 >>>> . . . >>>> >>>> and in /lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/ : >>>> >>>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Oct 14 2016 >>>> /lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/ld-linux-armhf.so.3 -> ld-2.23.so >>>> >>>> so it appears armv7l was used for naming a >>>> hard float build in uname -p. >>>> >>>> Of course this does not check how uniform the >>>> various linux distributions are about such >>>> naming. >>>> >>>> Still it may mean that for linux-matching "armv7" >>>> might not be the right name for uname -p output. >>> >>> I tried another linux on the BPI-M3: gentoo . >>> >>> # uname -p >>> ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) >>> >>> (Wow. Not what I expected.) >>> >>> # uname -pa >>> Linux bananapi 3.4.39-BPI-M3-Kernel #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 3 13:47:01 >>> UTC 2016 armv7l ARMv7 Processor rev 5 (v7l) sun8i GNU/Linux >>> >>> # uname -m >>> armv7l >>> >>> # uname -i >>> sun8i >>> >>> # ls -l /lib/ld-* >>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 134192 Mar 26 2016 /lib/ld-2.21.so >>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Mar 26 2016 /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3 >>> -> ld-2.21.so >>> >>> So again armv7l seems to be the base name used for >>> a hardfloat little-endian context --although it >>> appears that "uname -m" gives text more likely to >>> be used in testing for how to configure to match >>> the live context. "uname -p" seems far less >>> standardized for its results. The same for >>> "uname -i". >>> >>> === >>> Mark Millard >>> markmi at dsl-only.net >> >> On both your linux you are using linux-sunxi which is a fork of the >> Allwinner kernel "maintained" by the sunxi community (and it is old). >> To have the proper values of uname one should test running linux >> vanilla kernel. > > They both reported (extracted from the earlier text > that I sent): > > 3.4.39-BPI-M3-Kernel > 3.4.39-BPI-M3-Kernel > > It is the same kernel version from the same group > for the same hardware context as far as what each > reported. > > While they may have varied the kernel for some > reason without changing the version identification > that is not want I would expect. > > I expected it was the Ubuntu vs. Gentoo code that > makes the difference, not the kernel. > > I'm not aware of a modern vanilla kernel for the > BPI-M3. Linux 4.11 have a correct support of A83T (and it will be better in 4.12) > From what I can tell for little armv7 boards like > this having older kernels is a common case and > is something ports code would normally deal with > upstream. It is not just sunxi as I understand. It depends, I think that Beaglebone based boards are using a more up to date kernel. And in the Allwinner world the C.H.I.P. is using mostly a vanilla kernel > I may do more experiments and report those too. > My notes are just information for Warner and others > to consider. I'm one of the "others" hence my reply :) > === > Mark Millard > markmi at dsl-only.net -- Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> <manu@freebsd.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?290f9213ac2b227442c68cb0e3f7fdd5>