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>