Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 13:29:17 -0300 From: Mitchell Horne <mhorne@freebsd.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: 32-bit executables on aarch64? Message-ID: <CADeAsy3=sROT9-JrvEGCwVfhFYufsiyfhCtL5J15PV5PU0PsGQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfq2ZgSqiu9ZK%2BQOZxkYDRyR=BtSEA9bZsU0h8%2B04Si_Wg@mail.gmail.com> References: <202103311655.12VGtx3T036893@office.dignus.com> <YGS1exSvCS7sFGn%2B@fuz.su> <E1269F39-41F2-40F7-B8F5-2E39349B9C3F@yahoo.com> <YGTlpD7ph2fPlaM6@fuz.su> <BDE56DE3-976D-4564-8ABD-D4D218C670F7@yahoo.com> <YGT7mHl1tXwmdXRn@fuz.su> <CADeAsy3dKYaCwCQ3NXvFAAExZt_aNAciw2hThL%2BJx3kNNbEPtw@mail.gmail.com> <20210401151755.GO92026@FreeBSD.org> <CANCZdfq2ZgSqiu9ZK%2BQOZxkYDRyR=BtSEA9bZsU0h8%2B04Si_Wg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 1:03 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 9:18 AM Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 08:48:50PM -0300, Mitchell Horne wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 7:45 PM Robert Clausecker <fuz@fuz.su> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi Mark, >> > > >> > > The intent is to test and develop software that only runs on >> > > armv7 (specifically, Mecrisp Stellaris, a Forth system written >> > > in ARM assembly). This is best done natively. >> > > >> > > It's actually kinda annoying that no binary release tarballs >> > > are provided for armv7, so setting up the jail involves an >> > > annoying make world step. For amd64 jails, I can just unpack >> > > the binary tarballs and fix the configuration and I'm good to go. >> > > >> > >> > This issue about lack of distribution sets for armv7 has come up a >> > couple of times. It wouldn't take much to start producing them >> > officially, so I plan to submit a patch for this once re@ is done with >> > the 13.0 release. >> > >> >> The problem is (was?) the armv6/armv7 bits used a specific KERNCONF for >> each SoC, which made it somewhat impossible to guarantee that >> distribution sets would "just work". As I understand it now, this is no >> longer an issue. >> >> However, the release/Makefile has no real knowledge of how to build >> a release for armv7; the build is done using release.sh and a specific >> configuration file for each board. >> >> If the previous comment regarding KERNCONF is indeed no longer an issue, >> I will be happy to work with you on creating these distribution sets. > > > KERNCONF was never an issue for userland, outside the boot loader bits. It mattered for a while because ubldr needed to know some stuff, but Ian fixed even that a long time ago (9.x or 10.x time frame, IIRC). > > We've moved to having GENERIC on armv7, and a special wart for RPIB for armv6. The former should be available as a generic set, just like we do for x86 where we bundle things with GENERIC. The RPIB stuff we can omit if need be. > > So the goal today is to have as generic an image as others. The IMAGE needs to be flavored with a specific u-boot to be bootable, but the binaries work with any armv7 kernel. > > I'm not entirely sure that we have to do this for 13.0 at the 13.0 release, but should for 13.1 for sure and ideally maybe a few days or weeks after 13.0 is released if possible. > I have the patch for this kicking around locally, so we can move on it soon. If I had been a little faster it might have made 13.0, but it seems better to wait at this point. Mitchell > Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADeAsy3=sROT9-JrvEGCwVfhFYufsiyfhCtL5J15PV5PU0PsGQ>