Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2024 09:21:13 +0000 From: "Tom Jones" <thj@freebsd.org> To: "Alan Somers" <asomers@freebsd.org>, freebsd-riscv@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Help wanted improving Rust support for RISC-V Message-ID: <fca8a77e-99b2-4615-a7d3-1dae4d2d3565@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAOtMX2iUfMktVkYrnc5ufQ460PpnqG2YP2DYmavAoDQz%2BOWk9g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOtMX2iUfMktVkYrnc5ufQ460PpnqG2YP2DYmavAoDQz%2BOWk9g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024, at 23:47, Alan Somers wrote: > I want to improve the state of Rust on FreeBSD in general, and RISC-V > in particular. My plan is: > > * Assemble a corpus of crates heavy on OS stuff (like Nix and Tokio) > and ensure that their tests pass on Riscv FreeBSD. > * Update libc's ABI to FreeBSD 12, finally eliminating the need for > COMPAT_11 on riscv to run Rust programs. > * Ensure that the corpus of crates still passes their tests. > * Convince the libc maintainers to use the FreeBSD 12 ABI, for riscv o= nly. > * After a full Rust release cycle (at least 6 weeks), and maybe two, > if there are no reports of breakage, and if Poudriere looks good, use > that as justification to raise libc's ABI for all architectures. > > But in order to do any of this, I need access to riscv hardware. A > virtual instance at Scaleway[^1][^2] would be ideal, but I don't know > if FreeBSD can run there. Has anybody tried it? Failing that, I > would need to either acquire some hardware myself, or borrow access to > somebody else's. Or, convince some other developer to do the work > himself. But I won't be able to help very much if I don't have direct > access. > > Can anybody on this list help me get some access? I can=E2=80=99t help with scaleway, it sounds like an interesting choice= .=20 I have no idea of the current state of easily and affordable available h= ardware. The visonfive 2 might be a good choice, there has been a lot of= work in the year since I last tried it.=20 https://adventurist.me/posts/00315 It=E2=80=99s probably still the easiest to get hold of if a little under= whelming.=20 You don=E2=80=99t mention qemu, is there some reason you can=E2=80=99t s= tart there? - Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fca8a77e-99b2-4615-a7d3-1dae4d2d3565>