From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Feb 27 17:09:19 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F67580D;
 Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:09:19 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com)
Received: from monday.kientzle.com (99-115-135-74.uvs.sntcca.sbcglobal.net
 [99.115.135.74]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5DB1F3D;
 Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:09:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (from root@localhost)
 by monday.kientzle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) id r1RH9G7l037186;
 Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:09:16 GMT (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com)
Received: from [192.168.2.143] (CiscoE3000 [192.168.1.65])
 by kientzle.com with SMTP id v6feiyk9zzsubemtd8df3k8cga;
 Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:09:16 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from tim@kientzle.com)
Subject: Re: ARM EABI directions
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
From: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com>
In-Reply-To: <EE066522-388C-45C4-8DB7-E2C7BBB60D69@bsdimp.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 09:09:15 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0435EF00-62B4-4389-BB3A-3351FC522C34@kientzle.com>
References: <20130227003517.GB7348@lor.one-eyed-alien.net>
 <28404C12-67F3-44F0-AB28-02B749472873@bsdimp.com>
 <C8B590D8-70D2-41DB-812B-859C0F20F765@kientzle.com>
 <EE066522-388C-45C4-8DB7-E2C7BBB60D69@bsdimp.com>
To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Cc: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:09:19 -0000

>>=20
>>>> +.if ${TARGET_ARCH} !=3D ${MACHINE_ARCH} && ${WMAKE_COMPILER_TYPE} =
=3D=3D "clang"
>>>> +.if (${TARGET_ARCH} =3D=3D "arm" || ${TARGET_ARCH} =3D=3D "armv6") =
&& \
>>>> +${MK_ARM_EABI} !=3D "no"
>>>> +TARGET_ABI=3D	gnueabi
>>>> +.else
>>>> +TARGET_ABI=3D	unknown
>>>> +.endif
>>>=20
>>> We need to fix the gnueabi issue with arm.  machine_arch should =
always be enough to be self-hosting, and while I fixed the armv6 issue, =
this has cropped up in its place :(.
>>=20
>> Personally, I would like to see us switch to gnueabi
>> entirely and drop the configuration options.
>=20
> Me too, but that would mean breaking 9.x binaries on 10.x systems, so =
some thought must be exercised here.

Why?  ARM was Tier 2 for FreeBSD 9.x, and the FreeBSD
package builds still don't support ARM packages, so I'm
not convinced that would be a problem.

OTOH, I'm hoping we can get ARM to Tier 1 for 10.x, so
this will be a concern after that point.

> My preference would be to support building eabi binaries only, but =
have a kernel option that would allow execution of oabi binaries.

That would make sense.  ISTR a thread discussing whether
it was possible to transparently support both eabi and oabi
syscalls.

> Then again, we are also heading to the soft fp vs vfp issue too=85

<sigh>  Yeah.

Tim