From owner-freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org Mon Nov 9 01:43:41 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc64@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 519F3A24557 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 01:43:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.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 2223F19DD for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 01:43:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 22322A24555; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 01:43:41 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: sparc64@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 07106A24553 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 01:43:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-qk0-x22e.google.com (mail-qk0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22e]) (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 B05F219D7 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2015 01:43:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by qkcl124 with SMTP id l124so65620068qkc.3 for ; Sun, 08 Nov 2015 17:43:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp_com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=OSNQBoQPTLgp1Q+3vzBiviNOBUqYrZe9FoOE+HUH6B0=; b=vrdFTFNRowl1cmHSEpOYVC/zA/k4XiNDkYUDXYdZt4zJ/UA5+KH+NCdY54o2A1GQnI q3oyDFF3lMI8sGZ4dl4CSNAKriGfddpGUhfK1xBvSGdztkfBMnjBxZ2HlyyP6lUOKepB y8xFBCL2/M8mlSsgH1Qy//I69/b1uZzfnPgJigrXjo8mrjsz5MrhS5Xtcl1Gs/Sf1IEp DgHllNmKeu5XMCZmRib1adwf2RvT8rcj+W+GZ/NbfnvZYkZB1lP2qD74KVs4R8NPVLmT b+vi0iYf8YcRIyA9e0+p4L2ahng2EOGDlBRnZLX3HSLztB49SdHCJboGk+Le8AQJKoCs Xyag== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=OSNQBoQPTLgp1Q+3vzBiviNOBUqYrZe9FoOE+HUH6B0=; b=R8cnMHhAcx1blxbaiEwHu7b0rVis98JTq5BaeLUe4bySTjXbh/K1ulNMI66Ha45phl 10Rpd04NhP1aK91O+9RWWG+E4Cv1BJZ2bo12nl/Y+wGFEYBmZT5RyLXnDL3Pw6xwVi6R s6Yy1ohoRE9hiAaf02uaOSM7OZ8Q7deCgTr6StSH90cLnn4d99//shsHWj61eDRBpzSV 7EnTuigIddH+A4o29jSdHXT/XHt1CuAKipylWbPhFRoXo8mKlhwDsQ7qkmjyESKEgGXg wY4cNELj48NxiweRsXQGKOfAYkNgYXDSdfjVuvQ/aeTKm/lNKw7YbDTAG7GL1oTtkTB5 t3oA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlqPu5l1CTacFugR3qLi5r6ZY7VW205qHAceGQasPVo7rrh6kCfSTaizrb0QbYf6PevVv5H MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.40.211 with SMTP id o80mr26286524qko.93.1447033419335; Sun, 08 Nov 2015 17:43:39 -0800 (PST) Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.140.27.181 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Nov 2015 17:43:39 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [50.253.99.174] In-Reply-To: References: <563A5893.1030607@freebsd.org> <2AAC0EF3-528B-476F-BA9C-CDC3004465D0@bsdimp.com> <20151108155501.GA1901@alchemy.franken.de> Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 18:43:39 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: LjDW_UbRuWn28eleGiK3SVEIdGs Message-ID: Subject: Re: Sparc64 doesn't care about you, and you shouldn't care about Sparc64 From: Warner Losh To: Ed Maste Cc: Justin Hibbits , Sean Bruno , freebsd-arch , sparc64@freebsd.org, Marius Strobl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2015 01:43:41 -0000 On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Ed Maste wrote: > 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. Speaking of CROSS_BINUTILS_PREFIX, we need to unify CROSS*PREFIX stuff with the CROSS_TOOLCHAIN stuff. Two different ways to specify thing. Warner