From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 21 18:35:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 898C316A4E1; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 18:35:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alc@cs.rice.edu) Received: from mail.cs.rice.edu (mail.cs.rice.edu [128.42.1.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0AE243D45; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 18:35:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from alc@cs.rice.edu) Received: from mail.cs.rice.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cs.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4848B2C2A66; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:35:26 -0500 (CDT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavis-2.4.0 at mail.cs.rice.edu Received: from mail.cs.rice.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by mail.cs.rice.edu (mail.cs.rice.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id VzcyWqqNjR38; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:35:25 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [216.63.78.18] (adsl-216-63-78-18.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net [216.63.78.18]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.cs.rice.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DC202C2A62; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:35:25 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <44C11E6C.3070302@cs.rice.edu> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:35:24 -0500 From: Alan Cox User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050817 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200607202242.k6KMgmQq064714@repoman.freebsd.org> <44C012D1.2050905@cs.rice.edu> <20060720.173927.790476985.imp@bsdimp.com> <20060721125118.GA6326@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <20060721125118.GA6326@dragon.NUXI.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, "M. Warner Losh" Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/mk bsd.cpu.mk X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 18:35:32 -0000 David O'Brien wrote: >On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 05:39:27PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > > >>In message: <44C012D1.2050905@cs.rice.edu> >> Alan Cox writes: >>: Warner Losh wrote: >>: >>: >imp 2006-07-20 22:42:48 UTC >>: > >>: > FreeBSD src repository >>: > >>: > Modified files: >>: > share/mk bsd.cpu.mk >>: > Log: >>: > Remove ALPHA optimization pointer for gcc flags. >>: > Add ARM optimization pointer for gcc flags. >>: > >>: > Revision Changes Path >>: > 1.53 +1 -1 src/share/mk/bsd.cpu.mk >>: > >>: > >>: I'm curious. Is there an ETA for a working arm tool-chain in CVS HEAD? >> >>As soon as I can work out with David how he wants me to commit it. Or >>until I get tired of waiting and make any mistakes I make his problem >>as punishment for not getting back to me in a timely manner. >> >> > >I'm working on getting it in upstream first - what was decided in the >past as the proper path to grow new architectures in FreeBSD. Otherwise >we can go down the same path we did in the past where our toolchain >diverged very far from the GNU sources and we were left on own >maintaining them. Note that from what I've seen none of the anxious ARM >kernel developers have spent one once of time on this issue. > >I'd like to ask when we'll get ARM resources in the FreeBSD.org cluster >so committers can have access to ARM - I don't. So it is hard to test >anything. Until a month ago no one would agree on a reference platform >so toolchain work could be tested vs. spending all my time trying to get >something working that no one else had. I am still waiting to get the >ARM board I purchased in my hands and working. > >Alan I'm curious, for you what is the rush? > > > It complicates my efforts to maintain and improve the virtual memory system when I can only compile-test changes on five out of the six architectures in CVS without jumping through hoops. In other words, the lack of a tool-chain in CVS is becoming a drag, not just on those with particular interest in arm, but the project as a whole. For example. after consulting with grehan@ and marcel@, I decided that the best way to finish the PG_NX support on amd64 involved a pmap interface change, which means changing the arm pmap as well as the five that compile out-of-the-box. In summary, I'm not asking for change to come today, but I would like to see signs that there is a plan and progress toward executing that plan. Alan