From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 11 19:41:47 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88E0B492 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 19:41:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ignoranthack.me (ignoranthack.me [199.102.79.106]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6841CFE4 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 19:41:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.200.212] (unknown [50.136.155.142]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: sbruno@ignoranthack.me) by mail.ignoranthack.me (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9BB71941DD for ; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 19:35:50 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54DBAF15.60007@ignoranthack.me> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:35:49 -0800 From: Sean Bruno Reply-To: sbruno@freebsd.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD/arm64 MACHINE/MACHINE_ARCH identification References: <54DB9D93.6070702@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <54DB9D93.6070702@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 19:41:47 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 02/11/15 10:21, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > > On 02/11/15 09:41, Ed Maste wrote: >> The FreeBSD/arm64 work in progress currently reports "arm64" for >> the machine and processor type - i.e., uname -m and uname -p. > > It would probably also be good if we had MACHINE = arm here. > -Nathan > TARGET=arm TARGET_ARCH=aarch64 is much more friendly to my qemu universe as well. Is there going to be more than one TARGET_ARCH in aarch64? Is there code shared between TARGET_ARCH=armv6 and TARGET_ARCH=aarch64? sean >> It seems that the official, awkward name aarch64 is broadly used >> elsewhere - for example, in toolchain triples and autoconf tests. >> To save us grief in the future I think it is worth following >> suit: >> >> diff --git a/sys/arm64/include/param.h >> b/sys/arm64/include/param.h index 5cd0445..525a0e7 100644 --- >> a/sys/arm64/include/param.h +++ b/sys/arm64/include/param.h @@ >> -43,10 +43,10 @@ #define STACKALIGN(p) ((uint64_t)(p) & >> ~STACKALIGNBYTES) >> >> #ifndef MACHINE -#define MACHINE "arm64" +#define >> MACHINE "aarch64" #endif #ifndef MACHINE_ARCH -#define >> MACHINE_ARCH "arm64" +#define MACHINE_ARCH >> "aarch64" #endif >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQF8BAEBCgBmBQJU268TXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRCQUFENDYzMkU3MTIxREU4RDIwOTk3REQx MjAxRUZDQTFFNzI3RTY0AAoJEBIB78oecn5ktS0IALDbc9d+ql6EoEU/NelZ7X27 tS9oyXaGDBR6o2SU2v7NU5mZqwizsn4wzaLqwUbIOlrohlrAcHIW9A4yR98nUvxo 5eCK+Vwv3ZqSD8EtnVkd7Y+Mr2RUlAG9i3+rHgBsyHhjp85uYK1xg8K3xrUqdHEU GxALJReudIvrnCF4d05vyFYIUgqt7/1s17Ti4XE+Y1neOQlQ6Kmx9sXE0mEyah08 2mCCwQNjlSu5xOXzW0daMCtCo0AftPfD2ACwhw2ZQQIyLj8qwKVuChAfi5+Hdfy5 TfV0SZmVbai11GCh3pOIQm6js3X21XIUiTSslVrn4745sN5cHHYZc/rQgoB3Lnw= =jLJD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----