From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sat Sep 9 05:33:15 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C40B1E03F14 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0234804BE for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 9F863E03F11; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EAFFE03F10; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20C5B804BD; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id c80so9284818lfh.0; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:33:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=O52EakqqlfaNiSF+vZjqH75XWe65SN/guKL9B4aQLcQ=; b=sh9KDt4DRoErk55ozpMRmkpHwMzM/WHT07kqTh1XJxY6vCLJLPLnZLOXMvJk3JtbDu WBd4RkAJD/Vc/kgzvMlmA6cj3gIhcDK2GyLshtLWnf3B2ZmyZS/aWf5BvtqssAitfvgs kFVumtCnllmVIiWb5n4VWJiy5lm1kLjG/bvlGljQO5+WCoCF1b7ifj7nZzXcdXVbL8iY ZyyRnNNAOJcEqEY4fPIeDp6PhFOG7huSv4wHnBZz95lUtFCLwTevu+MOjFf+z9RY1Jwq yhRPG1jI1ASE09074vTKmBterMjo0QMBMJi7B3/VpHgqYuE7QMr/3MyMVzoyDrWB9KHt uA8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=O52EakqqlfaNiSF+vZjqH75XWe65SN/guKL9B4aQLcQ=; b=O4ak+qYQs9iBTMDwqCZKt4XwYuyEQyfMRD4mXTWlEGDDtQE4yILU29GxUJvydZ0b0U TARUJWYFTKLu66OZcwIDumoQwrrGPzbnjpuVGX22nBH4r87MhZC8XZc1l3UxGhE/0hna yxT0LY9XEy9kuWNGwQRPAa8Sbp0qVrSsH3C94gtuaalCbqJPxNW3LaDW+aZwRDpdl0SA VEbL4K7oiZK7RoyfwniEx2HB9j6tJWkBz967nn7763lQ9rXbrBPKNrR+TnC2rUffk12E syJI9vjaLMKm36Cl+vDQprvKVaPg6kFPn5uCeE4h/eX2poSgYF74S/vdwyreeLTh15rA Ch5g== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUiON2SHooOl5ljRvhXi4+j4nq/lsOBcm2frSUVa6vH1JTj+TRNA cZPevHT3KchVZ3FuAJ4+DPvyPc/0qmrmsYk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDBRiSeEQvY+u7q4NB+E7HjJZt5TIlm61LpjikDVLFghZOMAAHHSSVq1aW50p31QDWTTEy07qZpGJC0TUqaKZ8= X-Received: by 10.25.87.79 with SMTP id l76mr2215114lfb.117.1504935192763; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:33:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.81.18 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:33:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Russell Haley Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:33:12 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FCP-100: armv7 plan To: Warner Losh Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2017 05:33:15 -0000 On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Russell Haley wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >> > Greetings, >> > >> > This will serve as 'Last Call' for any objections to the plan to create >> > an >> > armv7 MACHINE_ARCH in FreeBSD, as documented in FCP-0100. >> > >> > Please see https://github.com/freebsd/fcp/blob/master/fcp-0100.md for >> > all >> > the details. This has been discussed in the mailing lists, on IRC, etc >> > and >> > I believe that I've captured the consensus from those discussions. >> > >> > I'm interested in any last minute comments, but as far as I can tell I >> > have >> > consensus on this issue. Absent any comments to the contrary, I'll >> > proceed >> > to having core@ vote that this document represents consensus. Now is the >> > time to speak up if I've gotten anything wrong. >> > >> > Once the core vote is done, I plan on committing the code reviews I have >> > open on this: >> > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12027 >> > and >> > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12010 >> > (again, I welcome any commits / criticisms in phabricator on the >> > specific >> > issues in this code) >> > >> > Thanks for any comments... >> > >> > Warner >> > _______________________________________________ >> > freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list >> > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm >> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> Hi Warner, >> >> Thanks for your work on this. General thoughts in and around this subject. >> >> 1) I like how you split the commit into generic build system changes >> vs BSP changes. It was helpful in aiding visibility in the code >> changes. > > > Thanks. > >> >> 2) Are these statements true? >> >> - We will not be differentiating hard/soft float. It is assumed >> armv6/7 are hard float (no letter suffixes) > > > Yes. We switched to only hard float on armv6 prior to the switch. While one > can still build a softfloat system, it's not really supported (we don't test > it, we don't build packages for it, etc). That support exists in the tree > for the transition libraries only and may be removed in the future. > >> >> - armv4/5 has no changes > > > Correct. > >> >> - armv6 is split into armv6, armv7 > > > Yes. > >> >> - armv8 is aarch64 > > > armv8 has no (current) meaning to FreeBSD. > >> >> - We will not be supporting aarch64 32 bit extensions for running >> armv6/7 binaries > > > That's an orthogonal problem that a aarch64 kernel will solve, but is > unrelated to the build system. > >> >> - There is no way to run aarch64 on armv7 > > > Nope. > >> >> 3) Can I ask if there will be other armv[0-9+] architectures created >> or do you think everything new will transition to 64 bit? If so, will >> we (FreeBSD) be able to differentiate those architectures in the >> future (aarch64v2)? I guess what I'm asking is "in your expert >> opinion, have we taken enough steps to ensure clean >> code/names/you-get-my-point for future changes?" What else could we >> do? It seems that there is a lot of changes in arm compared to other >> architectures. The rapid development of different things by the Arm >> group and other vendors seems to cause a lot of churn. Do you think >> our naming conventions do enough to take this into consideration? >> Modern hardware manufacturing seem much different then what I am >> reading about in Unix history. Have our naming patterns kept up? > > > Those are all good questions. While it's hard to say for sure they won't be > any new armvX architectures that implement 32-bit ABIs, there's been a > strongly telegraphed signal that all new ARM innovation will be in the > 64-bit area. They've also claimed that new revisions of aarch64 will be more > orderly and less chaotic than things have been in the 32-bit arm world. It's > unclear still if that will actually be the case, but given we have little > basis for guessing the proper names in the future, it's hard to future-proof > here. > >> >> 4) Also, if my supposition about arm 32/64 compatibility is correct, >> do we have plans in place for future boards may have 32/64 bit >> compatibility like the RPi3? Or, is it just two different builds and >> downloads? (which I'm cool with, but would like to know) > > > The notion is that for those AARCH64 SoCs that have the ability to run > 32-bit, we'll have two builds. One will be aarch64 based and the other armv7 > based. We'll likely roll that into armv7 GENERIC so we can get away from > having so many distributions (move to more of a base image + flavoring > step), but that work isn't complete enough to talk much about. > > Work to make RPI3 work with a 32-bit kernel appears to be reaching > completion. There should be something there soon (if it hasn't already been > announced...) > > Warner > > https://www.netgate.com/products/sg-3100.html ? ;) Russ