On 9/15/07, Bernhard Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 04:07:12PM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote: > >On 9/15/07, Bernhard Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 12:50:59AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> >Author: vapier > >> >Date: 2007-09-15 00:50:58 -0700 (Sat, 15 Sep 2007) > >> >New Revision: 19840 > >> > > >> >Log: > >> >Blue Swirl writes: > >> >I got the library to compile with the attached patches, though dynamic > >> >loader crashes early. > >> > > >> >In buildroot I changed the architecture name by hand from sparc to > >> >sparc64, otherwise the compiler produced 32-bit files with V9 (64-bit) > >> >instructions. This configuration is not supported by QEMU, so I aimed > >> >for pure 64-bit. I think Sparc64 option needs to be added to > >> >buildroot. > >> > >> http://buildroot.uclibc.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi?rev=19853&view=rev > >> > >> Blue Swirl, please let me know if that's correct and useable now. > > > >The CPU selection could be improved so that for Sparc64, only the > >following are valid: > >config BR2_sparc_v9 > >config BR2_sparc_ultrasparc > >config BR2_sparc_ultrasparc3 > >config BR2_sparc_niagara > > Ok, will do. > > >I'm not so sure about removing those from Sparc(32) options, because > >then we could not build a 32-bit environment for V9 CPU. > > In uClibc, we have v7, v8, v9, v9b (?). > What is the relation between insn-set/insn scheduler for these: > sparclite: f930, f934, sparclite86x > sparclet: tsc701 > Are these all v8 (for uClibc)?
These are v7 (sparc32, early 1990s), the difference between v7 and v8 is that a few more instructions (div, mul) are implemented in hardware in v8. I think kernel emulates the missing instructions (with a speed penalty). > And what is v9b? An extended insn set or just v9 with a different > scheduling? V9 plus VIS (much like MMX) instructions, like falignaddr and aligndata used in libc/string/sparc/sparc64/memcpy.S. That by the way makes it difficult to target plain V9... > >I'm just trying a native build, looks like the compiler options build > >are not correct, there is -mcpu=v7 flag even though I selected v9. > > Sounds odd, i'll look into this. > Sorry, I think it was "k7" for cross compile host in the other window, not v7. _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
