From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sun Nov 8 21:45:29 2015 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 1C0E9A2999F; Sun, 8 Nov 2015 21:45:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ig0-x22b.google.com (mail-ig0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22b]) (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 DB19A1C4B; Sun, 8 Nov 2015 21:45:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from carpeddiem@gmail.com) Received: by igcph11 with SMTP id ph11so15705412igc.1; Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:45:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=sNvzXFfKPNb30GTFXo1wJn7WRbgIgB0R8R4IZIWGXsg=; b=ruIvNlqyfE1LMbEEwlJCIDHE4+NnUDQ40VtK4T8FQAslOVkOSqUmJH7u9jzrh+Netp r0rgqob2N7vXPaPled6yAiJvgdgrC6U8jgu2/JPSqyWvz0IlrWBMmdbIuNiNctIlfi4s PDamoZdk9JJVHH4zPfd/qnA52Tp5eKnL7yKD9xDhC7yFoBzi0bya7Y/mCLpPtEHCW68r M1pG2aWzH9VrECDeDtyh9B08AsN29Gqd5ZuASeZ6c9oepCW9kgH3j7F9bRIW6w1J+Lis 7aupiy4LGhiTH/WV2BtI6CLCJ1G8xKqKpS6XELl4kH02oIh90MPQp15/HXwWrNOarfjO 22vw== X-Received: by 10.50.108.100 with SMTP id hj4mr16636695igb.97.1447019128123; Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:45:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: carpeddiem@gmail.com Received: by 10.107.158.148 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Nov 2015 13:45:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <563A5893.1030607@freebsd.org> <2AAC0EF3-528B-476F-BA9C-CDC3004465D0@bsdimp.com> <20151108155501.GA1901@alchemy.franken.de> From: Ed Maste Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 21:45:08 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 69QemNgGw4-8T4GvrrfXNq9WrIk Message-ID: Subject: Re: Sparc64 doesn't care about you, and you shouldn't care about Sparc64 To: Justin Hibbits Cc: Marius Strobl , Sean Bruno , freebsd-arch , sparc64@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2015 21:45:29 -0000 On 8 November 2015 at 20:46, Justin Hibbits wrote: > > I 100% agree with you on this. If we can update binutils to the > latest and greatest, I believe powerpc64 would be able to work with > clang. I've backported several patches, with IBM's permission, to > binutils for handling new relocations, etc. However, not all patches > are straight forward, and currently we're missing something, which is > causing odd segfaults in ld(1), when linking as(1). No other binary, > only as(1). I've tried looking through it, but the binutils code is a > mess. I'm sure the bug that's getting hit was fixed with newer > binutils, but have had a very hard time trying to test with it. We have support in the tree to use an external binutils automatically - we use this on arm64, which is completely unsupported by the in-tree binutils. External binutils is enabled by setting CROSS_BINUTILS_PREFIX=/usr/local/${TARGET_ARCH}-freebsd/bin/ This happens automatically if the target specifies BINUTILS_BOOTSTRAP in BROKEN_OPTIONS -- for example, arm64 sets BROKEN_OPTIONS+=BINUTILS BINUTILS_BOOTSTRAP GCC GCC_BOOTSTRAP GDB I'd suggest that the first step in any of these discussions is to use this to test building with the binutils port. We know it won't work for mips today because upstream bintuils lacks FreeBSD/mips support. It may work for other targets though. Even if it doesn't the same work needs to be done regardless of whether the target uses an up-to-date binutils from ports or from the src tree.