From owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan 27 21:54:04 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-sparc64@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: sparc64@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C72C4DDB
 for <sparc64@freebsd.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 21:54:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vlakno.cz (mail.vlakno.cz [95.129.96.251])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 871831536
 for <sparc64@freebsd.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 21:54:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by vlakno.cz (Postfix, from userid 1002)
 id 05FCE1CC55E8; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 22:54:03 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 22:54:03 +0100
From: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>
To: Craig Butler <craig001@lerwick.hopto.org>
Subject: Re: Call for help: clang/llvm for sparc64
Message-ID: <20140127215402.GA85169@freebsd.org>
References: <k1w7uhh383gn36hdmmwmq8f3.1389964362925@email.android.com>
 <20140117221330.GA2788@freebsd.org>
 <1390175474.8376.3.camel@atlas.lerwick.hopto.org>
 <3866560.132.1390324121556.JavaMail.craig@w520>
 <20140121170801.GA56661@freebsd.org> <52E553E6.6020902@pix.net>
 <20140126190349.GA89295@freebsd.org>
 <20140127200331.GA80131@freebsd.org>
 <3051948.261.1390859647458.JavaMail.craig@w520>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3051948.261.1390859647458.JavaMail.craig@w520>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)
Cc: Kurt Lidl <lidl@pix.net>, sparc64@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the Sparc <freebsd-sparc64.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-sparc64>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-sparc64/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-sparc64>,
 <mailto:freebsd-sparc64-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 21:54:04 -0000

On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 09:50:52PM +0000, Craig Butler wrote:
> 
> 
> > Btw, can someone test this patch? ie. compile (with gcc) sparc64
> > kernel
> > with it and boot it?
> > 
> > > Yes, I had to fix that but forgot to upstream it.
> > > 
> > > Index: sparc64/include/pcpu.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- sparc64/include/pcpu.h      (revision 259767)
> > > +++ sparc64/include/pcpu.h      (working copy)
> > > @@ -70,9 +70,26 @@
> > >  struct pcb;
> > >  struct pcpu;
> > >  
> > > -register struct pcb *curpcb __asm__(__XSTRING(PCB_REG));
> > > -register struct pcpu *pcpup __asm__(__XSTRING(PCPU_REG));
> > > +static __inline __pure2 struct pcb *
> > > +__curpcb(void)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct pcb *pcb;
> > >  
> > > +       __asm("ldx [%" __XSTRING(PCB_REG) "], %0" : "=r" (pcb));
> > > +       return (pcb);
> > > +}
> > > +#define curpcb (__curpcb())
> > > +
> > > +static __inline __pure2 struct pcpu *
> > > +__curpcpu(void)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct pcpu *pcpu;
> > > +
> > > +       __asm("ldx [%" __XSTRING(PCPU_REG) "], %0" : "=r" (pcpu));
> > > +       return (pcpu);
> > > +}
> > > +#define pcpup  (__curpcpu())
> > > +
> > >  #define        PCPU_GET(member)        (pcpup->pc_ ## member)
> > >  
> > >  static __inline __pure2 struct thread *
> > > 
> > > 
> > > the llvm sparc64 is not yet ready for wide consumption. Once llvm
> > > 3.4 is imported
> > > (days now) the sparc64 backend will be enabled as well. Then I plan
> > > to backport
> > > all the fixes from llvm trunk to enable it to selfhost. So that we
> > > can build
> > > llvm 3.5 with llvm itself. This is necesary as llvm is becoming
> > > c++11 only.
> > > 
> 
> Do you want us to apply that patch to /usr/src/sys/sparc64/include/pcpu.h then make with gcc ??
> Do we have to pull down HEAD or can this be applied over a 9.2|10-RELEASE ?
> Which gcc ??

-current and in-base gcc I would think would be the best. But 10.0R should work
too.

Roman