Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 11:09:19 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Ed Maste <emaste@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD/arm64 MACHINE/MACHINE_ARCH identification Message-ID: <498498C7-152D-49FB-8C11-D340901253F3@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <CAPyFy2AzsaNmpFBm6AtYgE=gfSuPZKWJdF2HVV-bLqtrbUXr3g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPyFy2A=Ev5gdYPKgEE0LS3-1sY%2BXmkZA7VCe71E6Fmbb=vMRw@mail.gmail.com> <607BF592-A09B-4DB4-9872-C9E63066AB57@bsdimp.com> <CAPyFy2Bgrap3TkFNuChyMC0Vwbjdt5FVW0ey03XtkK1iwNL1KQ@mail.gmail.com> <71E9C1B9-F819-420B-90A5-A36D58E71817@bsdimp.com> <CAPyFy2ATn5xgsvePCdvzqnyBS45izVHdL8yLaQQoKeJenSv9tg@mail.gmail.com> <228428CC-4042-4902-90A4-E7040F4BFFF5@bsdimp.com> <CAPyFy2AzsaNmpFBm6AtYgE=gfSuPZKWJdF2HVV-bLqtrbUXr3g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Feb 16, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Ed Maste <emaste@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >=20 > On 12 February 2015 at 11:29, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >>=20 >> Traditionally in Linux, they have been a matched set. >=20 > It looks like it's not so straightforward in the GNU/Linux world > either. Excerpts from Debian's cputable file: >=20 > # <Debian name> <GNU name> <config.guess regex> <Bits> = <Endianness> > amd64 x86_64 x86_64 64 little > arm64 aarch64 aarch64 64 little >=20 > Debian and .deb derivatives use arm64 for the 64-bit ARM port name, > and I'm told Fedora and .rpm derivatives use aarch64. But in all cases > the CPU architecture reported by uname is aarch64. >=20 > Debian uses "amd64" for the 64-bit x86 port name, like us, but uname > reports x86_64. For pkg(8), we should use whatever MACHINE_ARCH lists, as that=E2=80=99s = what we do everywhere else. We just got done killing the arbitrarily = different names and I=E2=80=99d like to keep them dead :). We already don=E2=80=99t = match the debian conventions for many of our architectures, so that=E2=80=99s not a huge loss :) Based on our IRC conversations, I think we violently agree on the = following bits: (1) MACHINE_ARCH (-p) should be aarch64 (2) MACHINE (-m) should match /usr/src/sys/BLAH (3) we control what BLAH is It would be most compatible to use aarch64 for BLAH from a shell script perspective. It would be more in keeping with FreeeBSD=E2=80=99s other = architectures to have it be just =E2=80=9Carm=E2=80=9D. Having BLAH be arm, however, = presents many interesting logistical issues for the port mostly confined to the = kernel, but with a few tendrils into the build system. Having BLAH be aarch64, however, would mean we=E2=80=99d have to re-do the -m32 support and add = a second special-case to live along side the amd64 special case we have = now. So, there=E2=80=99s no clear cut answers here, except maybe that = =E2=80=9Carm64=E2=80=9D would present the most pain of the three sensible choices we have at our disposal for BLAH (arm, aarch64, arm64). Warner=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?498498C7-152D-49FB-8C11-D340901253F3>