Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 2 Jun 2010 18:06:32 +0530
From:      "C. Jayachandran" <c.jayachandran@gmail.com>
To:        Juli Mallett <jmallett@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-mips@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: HEADS UP: Toolchain changes coming soon. (Octeon, n32, n64)
Message-ID:  <AANLkTilYyTZRFvkly897pFgnISE9npT9BM1yuOiQr3rx@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim2hTTtLzD3_LzAXENumECY_5PRZaq_dYFLqeU1@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <AANLkTinXthc8drw_G8gYUCtUefTVb9JQWTIlqtgsofPt@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinKR9dTU61I6MzqQYHQruYsOpRfK1pmgHczK08w@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTileRE-StPhn4FpFJZFLSkkQ-0h6UYwx6v6mFdZk@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinJEO45FDw-Sq3es3Do3-S7BqlwnNt-crEFTMdf@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTim2hTTtLzD3_LzAXENumECY_5PRZaq_dYFLqeU1@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Juli Mallett <jmallett@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 02:17, C. Jayachandran <c.jayachandran@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>> That clears it up, thanks. =A0Looking at the patch, most of the changes
>> seems to be in binutils, are these from a specific version of
>> binutils? =A0I am asking because I'm not sure how the FreeBSD toolchain
>> is synchronized across architectures - are all architectures at the
>> same version of binutils, or can each architecture decide to update
>> its part of the tool-chain.
>
> I pulled some files from a slightly more modern version of binutils
> from a Cavium SDK than ours and reduced differences to make the
> relevant parts of code match the older binutils API we provide, while
> still providing the newer opcode interface and a couple of nearby
> things.
>
>>> Is there specific functionality you need in GCC?
>>
>> Netlogic has some updates for GCC and binutils in its SDK. But they
>> are not critical, and we have not merged these into the FreeBSD. =A0I
>> was not sure if I can get these changes into FreeBSD directly.
>
> If Netlogic can GPLv2 their specific changes or reimplement them
> relative to FreeBSD's toolchain, I think we would want to coordinate
> to get them into the tree. =A0Our goal is generally to produce a
> fully-working self-hosting system out of the box. =A0That may change at
> some point, especially if Warner's work on supporting external
> toolchains better pans out well, but I think for now it's a reasonable
> goal.

Stock binutils and GCC works fine for XLR (it is mips64 compliant), so
XLR is self-hosting with the current FreeBSD MIPS tool-chain.  Our
patch for GCC is for adding 'xlr' machine description and march/mtune
options. The binutils patch is for a few XLR specific instructions for
which we currently '.word' in assembly for.  So both of these are not
really needed.

Also licensing should not be an issue here -  I'll have a go at this
once the other toolchain changes are in.

> Note that my understanding is that David O'Brien is working on
> bringing in the last GPLv2 binutils which will make the differences
> required for mips64r2 and Octeon substantially-smaller and I would
> hope for Netlogic processors as well.

JC.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTilYyTZRFvkly897pFgnISE9npT9BM1yuOiQr3rx>