From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Wed Sep 6 15:03:10 2017 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 BB66FE06DD2 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2017 15:03:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from helen.carter@protechnologyaccounts.net) Received: from mail-it0-x248.google.com (mail-it0-x248.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::248]) (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 2F15571191 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2017 15:03:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from helen.carter@protechnologyaccounts.net) Received: by mail-it0-x248.google.com with SMTP id 14so3682774itk.10 for ; Wed, 06 Sep 2017 08:03:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protechnologyaccounts-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:message-id:date:subject:from:to; bh=PujlqoZdI7H/yR/GjMTBRdrlFMl9zLRLuTaf7ktFskA=; b=pDy6U2zY3oO+YVQgu/FV3iztuW7iBV9aiVVOf1RgbWznzK8/sUeFQMQfgGmzKE0uf9 Zlaw8hfBbvqc/jYr15MRQ5h7E+1fxK94LfFdoOgYgS8JROD4+C8zN1q0tS7yA4+okhVG +GoeoNG4Cvab8KJuVBvgOPlTY6CQ0EFzoBqOLtpVBKI/ogLB4+YITnXTnSrgLgOj8U4Z Im8cJdRm9MmMCPPldNUX+GSsnWpUx17nzkFdKUTzO9B7XixLd45hmKY7Fp4Pn+Tvu9v3 YIMte1u5tNX2JNjfsUHotOL4LpcPI6FujipyH8CtNshnO496BFEmC7U3NHbCwtRQPip2 e4jw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:from:to; bh=PujlqoZdI7H/yR/GjMTBRdrlFMl9zLRLuTaf7ktFskA=; b=iIz3jtrYtSY2UQagg48I10qwFoh/xY20o0nYexZ1iwPlDVf4d784vhTGtxeJb8HPDy YM7UbibupDjPu++Bf+Mt1SV+j048tMJN9xmfqj7ILs6jNSjGU9dBqVl6ZybxlIcUREHh CvYU9kgYpJBTavg+hBe/EHZNeALINY5QhvFR3ZgFWjP1CbQH4lLxy15jXukqm7AaCKsV obc3AGAy1wKSPquNY6I9B7BeO/drz7lF9wdRWhqTjyKeLaPahx6aA5T07dESvhpYo7kn bPW+BcSSJ4WYsEVwQ3V7RoMhriYEuzBa3Ua0Ljcnfuvb5Q0ulmCmLmbHszFEBfFDEHcZ KozA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUhoU0TRc3NETxiRmXv+BainekV2SCiZ0BkrjOT09PDM2fOhOx5X rLVXZan5VQB//9d6dMoBgVZUGiQKyU8B X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCQJfLaz0fqv0h+mHUXiy+y7B8PSAKueKfmlhQ2YMCdGE+U48ny5NCg9X2dItnsIGZqJeO2KfMOkw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.162.7 with SMTP id l7mr1682206ioe.139.1504710189233; Wed, 06 Sep 2017 08:03:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <001a1140e63851ee89055886a466@google.com> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 15:03:09 +0000 Subject: Decision Makers List From: helen.carter@protechnologyaccounts.net To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 15:03:11 -0000 PGRpdiBkaXI9Imx0ciI+PHAgY2xhc3M9ImdtYWlsLU1zb05vU3BhY2luZyI+PHNwYW4gIA0Kc3R5 bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkFyaWFsLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6cmdi KDMxLDc4LDEyMSk7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1pbWFnZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcG9zaXRpb246 aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXNpemU6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXJlcGVhdDppbml0aWFs O2JhY2tncm91bmQtb3JpZ2luOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jbGlwOmluaXRpYWwiPkhlbGxv LDwvc3Bhbj48c3BhbiAgDQpzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6QXJpYWws c2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjpyZ2IoMzEsNzgsMTIxKSI+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gIA0Kc3R5 bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQtaW1hZ2U6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXBvc2l0aW9uOmluaXRpYWw7 YmFja2dyb3VuZC1zaXplOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1yZXBlYXQ6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3Jv dW5kLW9yaWdpbjppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtY2xpcDppbml0aWFsIj5Xb3VsZCAgDQp5b3Ug YmUgaW50ZXJlc3RlZCBpbiB0aGUgYmVsb3cgU29mdHdhcmUNClVzZXJzIGNvbnRhY3QgaW5mb3Jt YXRpb24gZm9yIHlvdXIgbWFya2V0aW5nIHB1cnBvc2U/PC9zcGFuPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxicj4N CjxiPjxzcGFuICANCnN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWltYWdlOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1w b3NpdGlvbjppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtc2l6ZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcmVwZWF0 OmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1vcmlnaW46aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNsaXA6aW5pdGlh bCI+RVJQLSAgDQpKRA0KRWR3YXJkcywgSW5mb3IgQmFhbiwgU0FQLCBFeGFjdCBTb2Z0d2FyZSwg TmV0U3VpdGUsIFBlb3BsZVNvZnQsICANCmV0Yy48L3NwYW4+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gIA0K c3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQtaW1hZ2U6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXBvc2l0aW9uOmluaXRp YWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1zaXplOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1yZXBlYXQ6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNr Z3JvdW5kLW9yaWdpbjppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtY2xpcDppbml0aWFsIj5DUk0tICANClNh bGVzRm9yY2UsIE1TIER5bmFtaWNzLCBOZXRTdWl0ZSwgU2llYmVsLA0KVGVyYWRhdGEsIEVwaWNv ciwgSW5mb3IsIENEQyBTb2Z0d2FyZSwgZXRjLjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiAgDQpz dHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZC1pbWFnZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcG9zaXRpb246aW5pdGlh bDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXNpemU6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXJlcGVhdDppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tn cm91bmQtb3JpZ2luOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jbGlwOmluaXRpYWwiPkVuZ2luZWVyaW5n ICANClNvZnR3YXJlLSBBdXRvZGVzaywgU2llbWVucyBQTE0sDQpBZG9iZSwgQXV0b0NBRCwgTUFZ QSwgUmV2aXR0LCBTb2xpZHdvcmtzLCBQVEMsIE1BRENBRCwgZXRjLjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8YnI+ DQo8c3BhbiAgDQpzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZC1pbWFnZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcG9z aXRpb246aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXNpemU6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXJlcGVhdDpp bml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtb3JpZ2luOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jbGlwOmluaXRpYWwi PkNsb3VkICANCkNvbXB1dGluZy0gQW1hem9uLCBSYWNrU3BhY2UsIEdvb2dsZSBBUFBTLA0KSHlw ZXItViwgTmV0QXBwLCBldGMuPC9zcGFuPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxzcGFuICANCnN0eWxlPSJiYWNr Z3JvdW5kLWltYWdlOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1wb3NpdGlvbjppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91 bmQtc2l6ZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcmVwZWF0OmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1vcmln aW46aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNsaXA6aW5pdGlhbCI+U3RvcmFnZSAgDQphcHBsaWNhdGlv biAtIE5ldEFwcCwgRU1DLCBDaXRyaXgsIEhQLA0KQnJvY2FkZSwgREVMTCwgZXRjLjwvc3Bhbj48 YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiAgDQpzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZC1pbWFnZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tn cm91bmQtcG9zaXRpb246aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXNpemU6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5k LXJlcGVhdDppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtb3JpZ2luOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jbGlw OmluaXRpYWwiPlNlY3VyaXR5ICANClNvZnR3YXJlLSBTeW1hbnRlYywgTWNBZmVlLCBJQk0sDQpS aXZlcmJlZCwgVGFiYmVyZywgQ29tbXZhdWx0LCBKdW5pcGVyIE5ldHdvcmtzLCBGNSwgZXRjLjwv c3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiAgDQpzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZC1pbWFnZTppbml0aWFs O2JhY2tncm91bmQtcG9zaXRpb246aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXNpemU6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNr Z3JvdW5kLXJlcGVhdDppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtb3JpZ2luOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3Vu ZC1jbGlwOmluaXRpYWwiPk5ldHdvcmtpbmctICANCkJyb2NhZGUsIFN5bWFudGVjLCBBdmF5YSwg Q2lzY28sDQpTaG9yZVRlbCwgZXRjLjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiAgDQpzdHlsZT0i YmFja2dyb3VuZC1pbWFnZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcG9zaXRpb246aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNr Z3JvdW5kLXNpemU6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXJlcGVhdDppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQt b3JpZ2luOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jbGlwOmluaXRpYWwiPk1lZGljYWwgIA0KU29mdHdh cmUtIE5leHRHZW4sIEFsbFNjcmlwdHMsIEVNUiwNCk1jS2Vzc29uLCBQcmFjdGljZSBGdXNpb24s IGVDbGluaWNhbCBXb3JrcywgZXRjLjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiAgDQpzdHlsZT0i YmFja2dyb3VuZC1pbWFnZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcG9zaXRpb246aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNr Z3JvdW5kLXNpemU6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXJlcGVhdDppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQt b3JpZ2luOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jbGlwOmluaXRpYWwiPkFjY291bnRpbmcgIA0KU29m dHdhcmUtIFNhZ2UsIFBlYWNoVHJlZSwNClRpbWJlcmxpbmUsIE1TIER5bmFtaWNzLCBOZXRTdWl0 ZSwgRGVsdGVrLCBMYXdzb24sIFF1aWNrQm9va3MsICANCmV0Yy48L3NwYW4+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0K PHNwYW4gIA0Kc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQtaW1hZ2U6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXBvc2l0 aW9uOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1zaXplOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1yZXBlYXQ6aW5p dGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLW9yaWdpbjppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtY2xpcDppbml0aWFsIj5C dXNpbmVzcyAgDQpJbnRlbGxpZ2VuY2UtIFNBUCBCdXNpbmVzcyBPYmplY3RzLA0KTWljcm9zdHJh dGVyZ3ksIFRpYmNvLCBNaWNyb3NvZnQgQkksIFFsaWtUZWNoLCBJbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBCdWlsZGVy cywgIA0KZXRjLjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8L2I+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gIA0Kc3R5bGU9ImJh Y2tncm91bmQtaW1hZ2U6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXBvc2l0aW9uOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dy b3VuZC1zaXplOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1yZXBlYXQ6aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLW9y aWdpbjppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtY2xpcDppbml0aWFsIj5XZSAgDQpwcm92aWRlIGRhdGEg YWNyb3NzIHRoZSBnbG9iZSAtIE5vcnRoDQpBbWVyaWNhLCBFTUVBLCBBc2lhIFBhY2lmaWMgYW5k IExBVEFNLjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiAgDQpzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZC1pbWFn ZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcG9zaXRpb246aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXNpemU6aW5p dGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLXJlcGVhdDppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtb3JpZ2luOmluaXRpYWw7 YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jbGlwOmluaXRpYWwiPldlICANCnByb3ZpZGUgdGhlIGRlY2lzaW9uIE1ha2Vy cyBjb250YWN0cyBsaWtlDQpDSU8sIENUTywgQ0lTTywgSVQgVlAsIElUIERpcmVjdG9yLCBJVCBt YW5hZ2VyLCBJVCBoZWFkLCBldGMuPC9zcGFuPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjxzcGFuICANCnN0eWxlPSJi YWNrZ3JvdW5kLWltYWdlOmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1wb3NpdGlvbjppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tn cm91bmQtc2l6ZTppbml0aWFsO2JhY2tncm91bmQtcmVwZWF0OmluaXRpYWw7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1v cmlnaW46aW5pdGlhbDtiYWNrZ3JvdW5kLWNsaXA6aW5pdGlhbCI+UGxlYXNlICANCnJldmlldyBh bmQgbGV0IG1lIGtub3cgaWYgeW91IGFyZSBsb29raW5nDQpmb3IgYW55IHR5cGUgb2YgbGlzdCBh bmQgd2UgY2FuIHNlcnZpY2UgeW91Ljwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3Bhbj48L3NwYW4+PC9z cGFuPjwvcD4NCg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9ImdtYWlsLU1zb05vU3BhY2luZyI+PHNwYW4gIA0Kc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkFyaWFsLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6cmdiKDMx LDc4LDEyMSkiPkF3YWl0ICANCnlvdXIgcmVzcG9uc2UhPGJyPg0KPGI+SGVsZW48YnI+DQpEYXRh IFNwZWNpYWxpc3Q8L2I+PHNwYW4+PC9zcGFuPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQoNCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFp bC1Nc29Ob1NwYWNpbmciPjxzcGFuICANCnN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTBwdDtmb250LWZhbWls eTpBcmlhbCxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOnJnYigzMSw3OCwxMjEpIj7CoDwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQoN CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbC1Nc29Ob1NwYWNpbmciPjxzcGFuICANCnN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6 MTBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTpBcmlhbCxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOnJnYigxOTEsMTkxLDE5MSki PlRvICANCm9wdCBvdXQgcGxlYXNlDQpyZXBseSB3aXRoICZxdW90O3JlbW92ZSZxdW90OyBpbiB0 aGUgc3ViamVjdCAgDQpsaW5lPHNwYW4+PC9zcGFuPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+PC9kaXY+DQo8cD4mbmJz cDs8L3A+PGEgc3R5bGU9J2Rpc3BsYXk6IGJsb2NrOyBtYXJnaW46IDMycHggMCA0MHB4IDA7IHBh ZGRpbmc6ICANCjEwcHg7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMWVtOyB0ZXh0LWFsaWduOiBjZW50ZXI7IGJvcmRl cjogMDsgYm9yZGVyLXRvcDogMXB4IHNvbGlkICANCmdyYXk7ICcgaHJlZj0naHR0cHM6Ly9nb28u Z2wvMmtzZFJ2Jz5wb3dlcmVkIGJ5IEdTTS4gRnJlZSBtYWlsIG1lcmdlIGFuZCAgDQplbWFpbCBt YXJrZXRpbmcgc29mdHdhcmUgZm9yIEdtYWlsLjwvYT4NCg== From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Fri Sep 8 03:21:12 2017 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 4A598E230FD for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 03:21:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from costumer.ppl@sup.co.uk) Received: from web14.glarotech.ch (web14.glarotech.ch [62.12.149.242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0DFCE6C for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 03:21:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from costumer.ppl@sup.co.uk) Received: from merlasco by web14.glarotech.ch with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1dq9qv-0004Pf-JM for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 05:21:09 +0200 To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: verify your account ! From: PayPal Message-Id: Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 05:21:09 +0200 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - web14.glarotech.ch X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [1197 1197] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - sup.co.uk X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: web14.glarotech.ch: authenticated_id: merlasco/only user confirmed/virtual account not confirmed X-Authenticated-Sender: web14.glarotech.ch: merlasco MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 03:21:12 -0000 From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Fri Sep 8 17:36:55 2017 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 30C5CE004FB for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 17:36:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) 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 1D094638D5 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 17:36:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 1930EE004FA; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 17:36:55 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 18CA1E004F9 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 17:36:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [96.47.65.170]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED84F638D4 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 17:36:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from John-Baldwins-MacBook-Pro-2.local (unknown [50.235.236.73]) by mail.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 26A3710A7DB for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:36:53 -0400 (EDT) To: arch@freebsd.org From: John Baldwin Subject: ELF auxiliary vector tags Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:36:52 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (mail.baldwin.cx); Fri, 08 Sep 2017 13:36:53 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at mail.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 17:36:55 -0000 Currently, each architecture defines a list of auxiliary vector tag values (AT_*) in the respective . Most of these lists are identical except that powerpc is missing AT_GID and AT_EGID and all the of the vectors after those two are thus N-2 on powerpc compared to all our other architectures. I noticed this while working on patches to add AT_HWCAP for ARM which debuggers can use to determine the layout of VFP registers (and which might have other uses at runtime). I'd like to move AT_* to sys/elf_common.h to have a single list across all platforms (the auxv parsing code in GDB for FreeBSD already assumes the list of AT_* values is identical across all platforms on FreeBSD). However, it would be convenient it powerpc could be updated to use the same values as all other platforms. This would probably be a flag day for powerpc (breaking all existing binaries) if we did it though, so I'm not sure if we can do that? I know Justin changed time_t to 64-bit on 32-bit powerpc which effectively broke 32-bit powerpc earlier, but this change would break both 32-bit and 64-bit powerpc and is probably more disruptive (in theory some binaries might have worked with a wrong time_t, but renumber AT_STACKPROT, etc. will probably break every binary). Does anyone object to making AT_* MI, and if not, can we "break" powerpc or do we need to preserve the AT_* values on powerpc? -- John Baldwin From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Fri Sep 8 18:04:28 2017 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 06362E01BFB for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 18:04:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.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 E23FF64BDE for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 18:04:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id DE1B6E01BFA; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 18:04:27 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 DDA09E01BF9 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 18:04:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 727D364BDD; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 18:04:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from tom.home (kib@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kib.kiev.ua (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id v88I4MLt022664 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:04:22 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 kib.kiev.ua v88I4MLt022664 Received: (from kostik@localhost) by tom.home (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id v88I4M2U022663; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:04:22 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com using -f Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:04:22 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov To: John Baldwin Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ELF auxiliary vector tags Message-ID: <20170908180422.GO1700@kib.kiev.ua> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FROM,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on tom.home X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 18:04:28 -0000 On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 01:36:52PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > Currently, each architecture defines a list of auxiliary vector tag values (AT_*) > in the respective . Most of these lists are identical except that > powerpc is missing AT_GID and AT_EGID and all the of the vectors after those two > are thus N-2 on powerpc compared to all our other architectures. > > I noticed this while working on patches to add AT_HWCAP for ARM which debuggers > can use to determine the layout of VFP registers (and which might have other > uses at runtime). > > I'd like to move AT_* to sys/elf_common.h to have a single list across all > platforms (the auxv parsing code in GDB for FreeBSD already assumes the list of > AT_* values is identical across all platforms on FreeBSD). However, it would be > convenient it powerpc could be updated to use the same values as all other > platforms. This would probably be a flag day for powerpc (breaking all existing > binaries) if we did it though, so I'm not sure if we can do that? I know Justin > changed time_t to 64-bit on 32-bit powerpc which effectively broke 32-bit > powerpc earlier, but this change would break both 32-bit and 64-bit powerpc and > is probably more disruptive (in theory some binaries might have worked with a > wrong time_t, but renumber AT_STACKPROT, etc. will probably break every binary). I added most if not all new AT_XXX constants. My impression from reading the mess of existing ELF standards, updates and mailing lists is that all the constants are considered as MD. Our AT_XXX values definitely do not match other systems values, so if we start considering them MI, it would be our own duty to maintain. I do not object against it. The only consequence right now would be that some values which are not needed on arches to become universally allocated and eating some space in consumers (look for AT_COUNT and esp. at the rtld.c:_rtld()). > > Does anyone object to making AT_* MI, and if not, can we "break" powerpc or do > we need to preserve the AT_* values on powerpc? It will be clear and serious ABI breakage on PPC, old ld-elf.so, libc and static binaries stop working. Probably, the breakage would be not in the form of segfaulting but rather a weird runtime behaviour. But if PPC maintainers do not care, why not ? From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Fri Sep 8 21:13:37 2017 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 351F4E0B141 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:13:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD3B6B0ED for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:13:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 0F1B4E0B140; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:13:37 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 0EBC7E0B13F for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:13:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-io0-x235.google.com (mail-io0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::235]) (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 CC8FB6B0EB for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:13:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-io0-x235.google.com with SMTP id n69so7048425ioi.5 for ; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 14:13:36 -0700 (PDT) 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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=g0VFRXYdiKm9MDibIirWXuutMZJqtxHbG53oGwRQtLc=; b=1AQxdL42wsNPqHRl736jRIeeXe9DXQtU9IFenbZLTc1Y6B6S1mHUPd4NcAxaoDCEAq wvxjCQPbtg5j7kfaRicC6kRtw5nSjJPogIrCyUavc22qPmT48JlfkWlQ6v/FUTEY0M0i +mRpzw5SA+Gzf2SKu4sH0vi29YIodbbstCUVH7KW4Lr/ffBTbtZljM9pyZNgV2xl5ruk uJUnEfSOGNr8TFj3o4B/tvnDG6lNWNhsyl8EwlNEn3GYj0WqnTQkKoPvZUVptNAUgRqN /67nqK+uizkp9qF18zfhJc6faUE2/yQZAcveD0tsDK2r+ae7K3qhfXC2a/yA+PKirPnJ 6suQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=g0VFRXYdiKm9MDibIirWXuutMZJqtxHbG53oGwRQtLc=; b=AI64cs1hQrBFD/cG+cTmmdPVTGkghhuP+alxUeYx+IWwHgIC52GYzZ2qoPhOKrgHwi SyXOmYNCrG/SjHbhitmdl4j3tnUGok+bSLYoM9CBYH+ClhAOG/cyd+KnbA6uuWMZxTxv pmfwW9TElWS9n4v1rkltlJ/rR5eULzt3Yg5NhCVvhqUAdqUbj76XCccZUiWsAoTTv7aH Ue8vc4ieDztdei+jwKLBai+Fph2c/HHJEO3PADM02PiKi3gcO0AO40HaroXtQq+Uk+5f V2JN/GjewL6maYghvK5v4dNZfxjgLYrjFwDjix3ROtwc39qiB9jg2wDU0kAtgfVR9OC3 2JZg== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUibnmwViy/6WC/RxsAjbh1+tPOwNcYCt+7Akn3n2mZO93mz/QFh J6g5lkdsWQ10CUoU+T6TRBHDOQ4e2STE X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDl6QcY4BeODcIEoCxfZd3mUn40McDiGl0gyXecRPPZghUzomS5+3qbDg0PED84bJ5eM4wTLbRx1Oa6wKgiCtQ= X-Received: by 10.107.142.83 with SMTP id q80mr5034090iod.208.1504905216120; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 14:13:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.10.71 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 14:13:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [50.253.99.174] In-Reply-To: <20170908180422.GO1700@kib.kiev.ua> References: <20170908180422.GO1700@kib.kiev.ua> From: Warner Losh Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 15:13:35 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: XlsDcVsh6JRD6MYB-b5qQp-Vb6Y Message-ID: Subject: Re: ELF auxiliary vector tags To: Konstantin Belousov Cc: John Baldwin , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 21:13:37 -0000 On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 01:36:52PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > Currently, each architecture defines a list of auxiliary vector tag > values (AT_*) > > in the respective . Most of these lists are identical > except that > > powerpc is missing AT_GID and AT_EGID and all the of the vectors after > those two > > are thus N-2 on powerpc compared to all our other architectures. > > > > I noticed this while working on patches to add AT_HWCAP for ARM which > debuggers > > can use to determine the layout of VFP registers (and which might have > other > > uses at runtime). > > > > I'd like to move AT_* to sys/elf_common.h to have a single list across > all > > platforms (the auxv parsing code in GDB for FreeBSD already assumes the > list of > > AT_* values is identical across all platforms on FreeBSD). However, it > would be > > convenient it powerpc could be updated to use the same values as all > other > > platforms. This would probably be a flag day for powerpc (breaking all > existing > > binaries) if we did it though, so I'm not sure if we can do that? I > know Justin > > changed time_t to 64-bit on 32-bit powerpc which effectively broke 32-bit > > powerpc earlier, but this change would break both 32-bit and 64-bit > powerpc and > > is probably more disruptive (in theory some binaries might have worked > with a > > wrong time_t, but renumber AT_STACKPROT, etc. will probably break every > binary). > > I added most if not all new AT_XXX constants. My impression from reading > the mess of existing ELF standards, updates and mailing lists is that > all the constants are considered as MD. Our AT_XXX values definitely do > not match other systems values, so if we start considering them MI, it > would be our own duty to maintain. > > I do not object against it. The only consequence right now would be > that some values which are not needed on arches to become universally > allocated and eating some space in consumers (look for AT_COUNT and esp. > at the rtld.c:_rtld()). I generally think it is a good idea. There's a few caveats though. PowerPC has a bunch of values that are different, though. If AT_COUNT was significantly different, I'd be inclined to make exceptions. However, it looks to be almost the same on them all... > Does anyone object to making AT_* MI, and if not, can we "break" powerpc > or do > > we need to preserve the AT_* values on powerpc? > > It will be clear and serious ABI breakage on PPC, old ld-elf.so, libc and > static binaries stop working. Probably, the breakage would be not in > the form of segfaulting but rather a weird runtime behaviour. But if > PPC maintainers do not care, why not ? I'm inclined to fall the other way. I'm inclined to have MI things for everything, except PowerPC. Since this breaks all binaries, it also breaks all upgrade paths, so I'd be quite leery of doing it. Sure, there's some wide-scale breakages, but I'd be inclined to make it be an exception since a small wart there sure beats a flag day that's even more severe than the time_t breakage. On the other hand, a clear message in UPDATING and the 'tier 2' card wouldn't be horrible here. Warner From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Fri Sep 8 23:11:06 2017 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 8E729E10A36 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 23:11:06 +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 6B0AB6E90D for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 23:11:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 67414E10A34; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 23:11:06 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 66E88E10A33 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 23:11:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-it0-x235.google.com (mail-it0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::235]) (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 36A046E907 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 23:11:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-it0-x235.google.com with SMTP id c195so6157236itb.1 for ; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 16:11:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=7k5+lM0EWkcVO6XayDoIT6rV7wDuUVv5IWvnBJ35WwI=; b=AIVjYBO6GvRJhQA2hAynfA7NX+XMVq4tkhoBS4mp1bvVwE/iU8R9LMen5lptOQPJZY BuHEDpQgICud7ycxSn32/+5LuVFxxTJJFIgR7NX4QteOZnNm0PQrjJUtw5J2DUANfpzM DQbjYKvzIMwB/oFN8xK30bTqA6YkoUMSe0M4fPu8qmmixJLb5ZisoCk+kG7ARGnnHQsM TTfKsB0Cbi7TsHfROAB4LoGN4DWQfqzPQWE9MAf3DIrRpAS4eKbJDhcSGJ9OeSoxhxEb gPxqhHnxP+5CFa1q+pPbmQtuhPjbvAImP4qc8TsBqgD5lrY59Snf10R50hACBlQ/XOpY GYGA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject :to; bh=7k5+lM0EWkcVO6XayDoIT6rV7wDuUVv5IWvnBJ35WwI=; b=MSTIxROLqk1CwG6oqEQ811/DHIP2oxPPQRK+eB3/unOIKsWcVUj8owmhikojZ7TfHU uhVpB80G3agq2vRQiwvp0C14NRz/ATb5wtX6HlDRlII6qY2BwY75LQ5WOsSf0sp0I9qZ nSyffPvwUaVpYdEVqkZhTbGeqOk/ohEbpv8HJpNL5JwGPbB4KYx6GBsIhIs078whzN5v S1ILaepzKJkZ7OlPgrezlqiLc0VIz2bkClR6u8FRII5Lot1UmWaA/ANQ/VwiDiyLepp4 L4Azwqx9jle0wwD6DlO1hc1Q53n3eYszFt5h+4HQ/1VBpbtWAc/qTsOr36RKxXmYbYJW cNBw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgQP90D7wI3cMm4rCcOvdatocypn2wWUypgjtH7IHtEaJ8Nduuf Pixr7qn/08BgQbvTvDwJseoHhCgMocTtcFY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb6pABPKF3d1sQputfEM4fnwXz/12mxyKefcsOY4b8dJj+7WXw/h1sYKzcoS/J84KRz6piEeQgLOtt+80VNKJfU= X-Received: by 10.36.179.79 with SMTP id z15mr3446935iti.26.1504912265386; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 16:11:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.10.71 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 16:11:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2603:300b:6:5100:d5ae:f1f3:42c8:b0f7] From: Warner Losh Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 17:11:04 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: j9ICoGeFYhLdcpnpNEjHMPD4sRE Message-ID: Subject: FCP-100: armv7 plan To: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 23:11:06 -0000 Greetings, This will serve as 'Last Call' for any objections to the plan to create an armv7 MACHINE_ARCH in FreeBSD, as documented in FCP-0100. Please see https://github.com/freebsd/fcp/blob/master/fcp-0100.md for all the details. This has been discussed in the mailing lists, on IRC, etc and I believe that I've captured the consensus from those discussions. I'm interested in any last minute comments, but as far as I can tell I have consensus on this issue. Absent any comments to the contrary, I'll proceed to having core@ vote that this document represents consensus. Now is the time to speak up if I've gotten anything wrong. Once the core vote is done, I plan on committing the code reviews I have open on this: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12027 and https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12010 (again, I welcome any commits / criticisms in phabricator on the specific issues in this code) Thanks for any comments... Warner From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sat Sep 9 01:53:02 2017 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 B283EE19E36 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 01:53:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90BE77418E for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 01:53:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 901EEE19E34; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 01:53:02 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 8F9CEE19E33; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 01:53:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com (mail-lf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]) (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 15F087418D; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 01:53:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: by mail-lf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id l196so8837603lfl.1; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 18:53:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xm7EaiP6G6i8yysmfJEpfljslx4YGUEb6TlhxBlOpCs=; b=iKMY9X4NfKrP5qkz+r1rUrz7zl4HgVdKn/7jb6tCM+RpIRe/A2uATWkE37QMr7XlI2 4wg8gBMkMXD0EbzMPJLiEX0S13PDJtgfxy2zY7ugPKj3RD5kGk3ANdJ8RCA6Mz/dbAYf SjS/zzMSM3w2f2RHCV0DrvBivfuIoZeh7ll2m6zdHqnvq9phRZ+sMQnPl9YkR0KvJqm1 ytTHiBJhq0SDNyGhz8uKLY3rt0NDUlZu12rpLvBlx1KreENOlYlTAls6mJ9H7EpJ+B+o ZwHlw3RrwTtsevSiwZkOnoTa4bGvCgs7aQ1HcFiQsCD3M+OEfacCKw1gAVK9OKtPp8uy AYbg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xm7EaiP6G6i8yysmfJEpfljslx4YGUEb6TlhxBlOpCs=; b=Zl6oWWvravhAGWHuMBLLZxC/N6Q5qzaCb/wX53fyZel7EIBFtSrASuzmZljfOVoxqv uLD2MWhLvmVjavbZnK03mh1s+YcjGAItB6GqWl021VmmwD6yhQLbE5tI1JYWLZAGLmTO PiD3W9ZuoTKLCeRcXoYN6c4ONkbJsTjQHvkgWb5qe/C3ApLWcvqZshG817b/J8IkNonU j8A5oaRq+RcNqH4vmlVttxTMWgHPttQqonQ5tmWmmpToI7Q56hjBLPC+LoabSOKyKj8v FhEqaJdyiw2p4+UWzwaBwcN0lHUV/qFEiW1i8JjneSBdRjVeC1JJURW/qEJQY1iYbIvy Bggw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUhXZyMugM5UgchsT98+ukgZjzN7I3AcNyRJzVIZY/e/qlif2ECW irLDBZ+9r9cgpGAZ6DTSz0xjK+9F1vvqrGs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb5fIYWcRzt0+PWw/3L6s2Qe3VRg/qXpEtyoJ7x65BQyOn8gwAx0vxitkdAXhUdvpahP1t/iRDam0xfMihULhW4= X-Received: by 10.46.34.67 with SMTP id i64mr1719191lji.71.1504921980079; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 18:53:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.81.18 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 18:52:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Russell Haley Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 18:52:59 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FCP-100: armv7 plan To: Warner Losh Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2017 01:53:02 -0000 On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > Greetings, > > This will serve as 'Last Call' for any objections to the plan to create an > armv7 MACHINE_ARCH in FreeBSD, as documented in FCP-0100. > > Please see https://github.com/freebsd/fcp/blob/master/fcp-0100.md for all > the details. This has been discussed in the mailing lists, on IRC, etc and > I believe that I've captured the consensus from those discussions. > > I'm interested in any last minute comments, but as far as I can tell I have > consensus on this issue. Absent any comments to the contrary, I'll proceed > to having core@ vote that this document represents consensus. Now is the > time to speak up if I've gotten anything wrong. > > Once the core vote is done, I plan on committing the code reviews I have > open on this: > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12027 > and > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12010 > (again, I welcome any commits / criticisms in phabricator on the specific > issues in this code) > > Thanks for any comments... > > Warner > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" Hi Warner, Thanks for your work on this. General thoughts in and around this subject. 1) I like how you split the commit into generic build system changes vs BSP changes. It was helpful in aiding visibility in the code changes. 2) Are these statements true? - We will not be differentiating hard/soft float. It is assumed armv6/7 are hard float (no letter suffixes) - armv4/5 has no changes - armv6 is split into armv6, armv7 - armv8 is aarch64 - We will not be supporting aarch64 32 bit extensions for running armv6/7 binaries - There is no way to run aarch64 on armv7 3) Can I ask if there will be other armv[0-9+] architectures created or do you think everything new will transition to 64 bit? If so, will we (FreeBSD) be able to differentiate those architectures in the future (aarch64v2)? I guess what I'm asking is "in your expert opinion, have we taken enough steps to ensure clean code/names/you-get-my-point for future changes?" What else could we do? It seems that there is a lot of changes in arm compared to other architectures. The rapid development of different things by the Arm group and other vendors seems to cause a lot of churn. Do you think our naming conventions do enough to take this into consideration? Modern hardware manufacturing seem much different then what I am reading about in Unix history. Have our naming patterns kept up? 4) Also, if my supposition about arm 32/64 compatibility is correct, do we have plans in place for future boards may have 32/64 bit compatibility like the RPi3? Or, is it just two different builds and downloads? (which I'm cool with, but would like to know) Cheers, Russ From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sat Sep 9 05:10:26 2017 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 F0629E031CE for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:10:26 +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 C870D7F8D9 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:10:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id C4F3BE031CC; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:10:26 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 C4982E031CB for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:10:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-io0-x234.google.com (mail-io0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::234]) (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 8F05E7F8D8 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:10:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wlosh@bsdimp.com) Received: by mail-io0-x234.google.com with SMTP id j141so9339755ioj.4 for ; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:10:26 -0700 (PDT) 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:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=XQZzCgIdGYWaBoa53PuqGKoN/rbGJcnYOYnyxTLmfAk=; b=tqlpEGEtZMeq3uyZBc+5guN8AyTpynfTNDzAHQ7cvsaY9fW19asOYH1ZmBpufsYXJo yHJWU9H44MNGsk/33E3UbYRdMBa0dJY9ZVqt2xMy534WA8acvkrKhv7QQpt536QgQeg0 8CRAl6thCC2tPYSQ/5Mjhwpyi+HMSyYmbmsbTtjvT9cRED0YVwTC8lRjhNOvPUSA5k6h Ob+XS+Nd+8H+O2TNrcl34end+5nFoTmthC04EkPv9V9CO2N6h5QV+6piVjdVhqqGBsRU Jk1uVOcLRCpD4SCvmU0xzAqtyMkmBdEs29IWBewmlqMIMLIOajRJrASNSItOVS+FpFow GrUA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=XQZzCgIdGYWaBoa53PuqGKoN/rbGJcnYOYnyxTLmfAk=; b=gv7gfvOISpvT1uJxQtqCUHnjY6rdWN1GIZN39Lg1qtKYK6Lv3Mo2+CM/C0KUi8Vijh K6w2JFSWjB1V2GIoJmYv5iPb6XCcdikdjErpX0CeDuhFTeirRWqGZxywFI8S+lJtNOpA n5Hv5VQUyvmjQBh7dvEdkfLhWSwwinkH0o0VUQqRoi5StxznFOxI7owOty0n4ZXHDRYT sCIo2t7PGwfnxD2m0iHGXI8MHPQfKaCWL1ZGzCJ4M7iRNrO6KZbqksF/OplYFVquQXFU wP+SrWwzSSZnIXF6MoJq+sQjgrDD4ie94X9gkq5kh8N3z6lDJTFLXXoCeUhouwbFAU2K 8oEA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUinoxnbhYk4mbtQXfIJmpaQZnMrtiduKoqESMFDMpLAg//t0LiH donBqmvLplnin6kU4h7zF+oxV3UmDo4H X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QBsL9THXylGfAKBUMm/IStLJMfynR5zDROaMRTOZSWPeaJM4aYXOjSCdbNZNinE8tgylFg42q6NQ8+U8aFKtrU= X-Received: by 10.107.185.7 with SMTP id j7mr4475431iof.221.1504933825673; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:10:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: wlosh@bsdimp.com Received: by 10.79.10.71 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:10:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2603:300b:6:5100:d5ae:f1f3:42c8:b0f7] In-Reply-To: References: From: Warner Losh Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 23:10:25 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7qz0nEKSezR6f3L6Dvt341iKQns Message-ID: Subject: Re: FCP-100: armv7 plan To: Russell Haley Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2017 05:10:27 -0000 On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Russell Haley wrote: > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > This will serve as 'Last Call' for any objections to the plan to create > an > > armv7 MACHINE_ARCH in FreeBSD, as documented in FCP-0100. > > > > Please see https://github.com/freebsd/fcp/blob/master/fcp-0100.md for > all > > the details. This has been discussed in the mailing lists, on IRC, etc > and > > I believe that I've captured the consensus from those discussions. > > > > I'm interested in any last minute comments, but as far as I can tell I > have > > consensus on this issue. Absent any comments to the contrary, I'll > proceed > > to having core@ vote that this document represents consensus. Now is the > > time to speak up if I've gotten anything wrong. > > > > Once the core vote is done, I plan on committing the code reviews I have > > open on this: > > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12027 > > and > > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12010 > > (again, I welcome any commits / criticisms in phabricator on the specific > > issues in this code) > > > > Thanks for any comments... > > > > Warner > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > Hi Warner, > > Thanks for your work on this. General thoughts in and around this subject. > > 1) I like how you split the commit into generic build system changes > vs BSP changes. It was helpful in aiding visibility in the code > changes. > Thanks. > 2) Are these statements true? > > - We will not be differentiating hard/soft float. It is assumed > armv6/7 are hard float (no letter suffixes) > Yes. We switched to only hard float on armv6 prior to the switch. While one can still build a softfloat system, it's not really supported (we don't test it, we don't build packages for it, etc). That support exists in the tree for the transition libraries only and may be removed in the future. > - armv4/5 has no changes > Correct. > - armv6 is split into armv6, armv7 > Yes. > - armv8 is aarch64 > armv8 has no (current) meaning to FreeBSD. > - We will not be supporting aarch64 32 bit extensions for running > armv6/7 binaries > That's an orthogonal problem that a aarch64 kernel will solve, but is unrelated to the build system. > - There is no way to run aarch64 on armv7 > Nope. > 3) Can I ask if there will be other armv[0-9+] architectures created > or do you think everything new will transition to 64 bit? If so, will > we (FreeBSD) be able to differentiate those architectures in the > future (aarch64v2)? I guess what I'm asking is "in your expert > opinion, have we taken enough steps to ensure clean > code/names/you-get-my-point for future changes?" What else could we > do? It seems that there is a lot of changes in arm compared to other > architectures. The rapid development of different things by the Arm > group and other vendors seems to cause a lot of churn. Do you think > our naming conventions do enough to take this into consideration? > Modern hardware manufacturing seem much different then what I am > reading about in Unix history. Have our naming patterns kept up? > Those are all good questions. While it's hard to say for sure they won't be any new armvX architectures that implement 32-bit ABIs, there's been a strongly telegraphed signal that all new ARM innovation will be in the 64-bit area. They've also claimed that new revisions of aarch64 will be more orderly and less chaotic than things have been in the 32-bit arm world. It's unclear still if that will actually be the case, but given we have little basis for guessing the proper names in the future, it's hard to future-proof here. > 4) Also, if my supposition about arm 32/64 compatibility is correct, > do we have plans in place for future boards may have 32/64 bit > compatibility like the RPi3? Or, is it just two different builds and > downloads? (which I'm cool with, but would like to know) > The notion is that for those AARCH64 SoCs that have the ability to run 32-bit, we'll have two builds. One will be aarch64 based and the other armv7 based. We'll likely roll that into armv7 GENERIC so we can get away from having so many distributions (move to more of a base image + flavoring step), but that work isn't complete enough to talk much about. Work to make RPI3 work with a 32-bit kernel appears to be reaching completion. There should be something there soon (if it hasn't already been announced...) Warner From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sat Sep 9 05:33:15 2017 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 C40B1E03F14 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.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 A0234804BE for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 9F863E03F11; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 9EAFFE03F10; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lf0-x22f.google.com (mail-lf0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22f]) (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 20C5B804BD; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:33:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from russ.haley@gmail.com) Received: by mail-lf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id c80so9284818lfh.0; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:33:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=O52EakqqlfaNiSF+vZjqH75XWe65SN/guKL9B4aQLcQ=; b=sh9KDt4DRoErk55ozpMRmkpHwMzM/WHT07kqTh1XJxY6vCLJLPLnZLOXMvJk3JtbDu WBd4RkAJD/Vc/kgzvMlmA6cj3gIhcDK2GyLshtLWnf3B2ZmyZS/aWf5BvtqssAitfvgs kFVumtCnllmVIiWb5n4VWJiy5lm1kLjG/bvlGljQO5+WCoCF1b7ifj7nZzXcdXVbL8iY ZyyRnNNAOJcEqEY4fPIeDp6PhFOG7huSv4wHnBZz95lUtFCLwTevu+MOjFf+z9RY1Jwq yhRPG1jI1ASE09074vTKmBterMjo0QMBMJi7B3/VpHgqYuE7QMr/3MyMVzoyDrWB9KHt uA8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=O52EakqqlfaNiSF+vZjqH75XWe65SN/guKL9B4aQLcQ=; b=O4ak+qYQs9iBTMDwqCZKt4XwYuyEQyfMRD4mXTWlEGDDtQE4yILU29GxUJvydZ0b0U TARUJWYFTKLu66OZcwIDumoQwrrGPzbnjpuVGX22nBH4r87MhZC8XZc1l3UxGhE/0hna yxT0LY9XEy9kuWNGwQRPAa8Sbp0qVrSsH3C94gtuaalCbqJPxNW3LaDW+aZwRDpdl0SA VEbL4K7oiZK7RoyfwniEx2HB9j6tJWkBz967nn7763lQ9rXbrBPKNrR+TnC2rUffk12E syJI9vjaLMKm36Cl+vDQprvKVaPg6kFPn5uCeE4h/eX2poSgYF74S/vdwyreeLTh15rA Ch5g== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUiON2SHooOl5ljRvhXi4+j4nq/lsOBcm2frSUVa6vH1JTj+TRNA cZPevHT3KchVZ3FuAJ4+DPvyPc/0qmrmsYk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDBRiSeEQvY+u7q4NB+E7HjJZt5TIlm61LpjikDVLFghZOMAAHHSSVq1aW50p31QDWTTEy07qZpGJC0TUqaKZ8= X-Received: by 10.25.87.79 with SMTP id l76mr2215114lfb.117.1504935192763; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:33:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.81.18 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:33:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Russell Haley Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:33:12 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FCP-100: armv7 plan To: Warner Losh Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2017 05:33:15 -0000 On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 7:52 PM, Russell Haley wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >> > Greetings, >> > >> > This will serve as 'Last Call' for any objections to the plan to create >> > an >> > armv7 MACHINE_ARCH in FreeBSD, as documented in FCP-0100. >> > >> > Please see https://github.com/freebsd/fcp/blob/master/fcp-0100.md for >> > all >> > the details. This has been discussed in the mailing lists, on IRC, etc >> > and >> > I believe that I've captured the consensus from those discussions. >> > >> > I'm interested in any last minute comments, but as far as I can tell I >> > have >> > consensus on this issue. Absent any comments to the contrary, I'll >> > proceed >> > to having core@ vote that this document represents consensus. Now is the >> > time to speak up if I've gotten anything wrong. >> > >> > Once the core vote is done, I plan on committing the code reviews I have >> > open on this: >> > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12027 >> > and >> > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12010 >> > (again, I welcome any commits / criticisms in phabricator on the >> > specific >> > issues in this code) >> > >> > Thanks for any comments... >> > >> > Warner >> > _______________________________________________ >> > freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list >> > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm >> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> Hi Warner, >> >> Thanks for your work on this. General thoughts in and around this subject. >> >> 1) I like how you split the commit into generic build system changes >> vs BSP changes. It was helpful in aiding visibility in the code >> changes. > > > Thanks. > >> >> 2) Are these statements true? >> >> - We will not be differentiating hard/soft float. It is assumed >> armv6/7 are hard float (no letter suffixes) > > > Yes. We switched to only hard float on armv6 prior to the switch. While one > can still build a softfloat system, it's not really supported (we don't test > it, we don't build packages for it, etc). That support exists in the tree > for the transition libraries only and may be removed in the future. > >> >> - armv4/5 has no changes > > > Correct. > >> >> - armv6 is split into armv6, armv7 > > > Yes. > >> >> - armv8 is aarch64 > > > armv8 has no (current) meaning to FreeBSD. > >> >> - We will not be supporting aarch64 32 bit extensions for running >> armv6/7 binaries > > > That's an orthogonal problem that a aarch64 kernel will solve, but is > unrelated to the build system. > >> >> - There is no way to run aarch64 on armv7 > > > Nope. > >> >> 3) Can I ask if there will be other armv[0-9+] architectures created >> or do you think everything new will transition to 64 bit? If so, will >> we (FreeBSD) be able to differentiate those architectures in the >> future (aarch64v2)? I guess what I'm asking is "in your expert >> opinion, have we taken enough steps to ensure clean >> code/names/you-get-my-point for future changes?" What else could we >> do? It seems that there is a lot of changes in arm compared to other >> architectures. The rapid development of different things by the Arm >> group and other vendors seems to cause a lot of churn. Do you think >> our naming conventions do enough to take this into consideration? >> Modern hardware manufacturing seem much different then what I am >> reading about in Unix history. Have our naming patterns kept up? > > > Those are all good questions. While it's hard to say for sure they won't be > any new armvX architectures that implement 32-bit ABIs, there's been a > strongly telegraphed signal that all new ARM innovation will be in the > 64-bit area. They've also claimed that new revisions of aarch64 will be more > orderly and less chaotic than things have been in the 32-bit arm world. It's > unclear still if that will actually be the case, but given we have little > basis for guessing the proper names in the future, it's hard to future-proof > here. > >> >> 4) Also, if my supposition about arm 32/64 compatibility is correct, >> do we have plans in place for future boards may have 32/64 bit >> compatibility like the RPi3? Or, is it just two different builds and >> downloads? (which I'm cool with, but would like to know) > > > The notion is that for those AARCH64 SoCs that have the ability to run > 32-bit, we'll have two builds. One will be aarch64 based and the other armv7 > based. We'll likely roll that into armv7 GENERIC so we can get away from > having so many distributions (move to more of a base image + flavoring > step), but that work isn't complete enough to talk much about. > > Work to make RPI3 work with a 32-bit kernel appears to be reaching > completion. There should be something there soon (if it hasn't already been > announced...) > > Warner > > https://www.netgate.com/products/sg-3100.html ? ;) Russ From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Sat Sep 9 16:18:31 2017 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 A80E3E1F482 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 16:18:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 937AF6E83B for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 16:18:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 8FD5DE1F481; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 16:18:31 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 8F7C6E1F480 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 16:18:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54FB66E83A; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 16:18:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from Julian-MBP3.local (106-68-193-181.dyn.iinet.net.au [106.68.193.181]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v89GIQZI006043 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 9 Sep 2017 09:18:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Subject: Re: ELF auxiliary vector tags To: John Baldwin , arch@freebsd.org References: From: Julian Elischer Message-ID: <6a29f889-016e-5a72-4124-7c58b605cf6c@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 00:18:20 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2017 16:18:31 -0000 On 9/9/17 1:36 am, John Baldwin wrote: > Currently, each architecture defines a list of auxiliary vector tag values (AT_*) > in the respective . Most of these lists are identical except that > powerpc is missing AT_GID and AT_EGID and all the of the vectors after those two > are thus N-2 on powerpc compared to all our other architectures. > > I noticed this while working on patches to add AT_HWCAP for ARM which debuggers > can use to determine the layout of VFP registers (and which might have other > uses at runtime). > > I'd like to move AT_* to sys/elf_common.h to have a single list across all > platforms (the auxv parsing code in GDB for FreeBSD already assumes the list of > AT_* values is identical across all platforms on FreeBSD). However, it would be > convenient it powerpc could be updated to use the same values as all other > platforms. This would probably be a flag day for powerpc (breaking all existing > binaries) if we did it though, so I'm not sure if we can do that? I know Justin > changed time_t to 64-bit on 32-bit powerpc which effectively broke 32-bit > powerpc earlier, but this change would break both 32-bit and 64-bit powerpc and > is probably more disruptive (in theory some binaries might have worked with a > wrong time_t, but renumber AT_STACKPROT, etc. will probably break every binary). > > Does anyone object to making AT_* MI, and if not, can we "break" powerpc or do > we need to preserve the AT_* values on powerpc? > I'm guessing it would require a 2 or 3 step process over quite a long time period. An alias for each of the entries about the one s you mention, while still supporting the ones in old binaries and then after a couple of years removing the originals, and then after a couple of years more, moving them to the new locations (with maybe some cookie change to declare old binaries unrunable or maybe something as radical a separate image executor.