This is the mail archive of the
libc-ports@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Re: PowerPC E500 port
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: Steven Munroe <munroesj at us dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, libc-ports at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 19:10:58 -0400
- Subject: Re: PowerPC E500 port
- References: <470ABC0B.5060704@us.ibm.com>
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 06:23:55PM -0500, Steven Munroe wrote:
> The path sysdeps/powerpc/powerpc32/e500/ is only appropriate if the
> intent was to CPU-tune the powerpc32 soft-fp ABI for e500 chips (i.e.
> not using the SPE features and not changing the size of
> jmpbuf/ucontext). Otherwise it is inapropriate as it requires a
> different (incompatable) ABI to use/expose the SPE features. Mixing
> these together seems error prone with code from powerpc32/fpu leaking to
> e500 builds or e500 code leaking into powerpc32 builds with random build
> breakage.
I don't understand. Why shouldn't e500 be a subdirectory of
powerpc32? It's a sibling of the soft FP version of powerpc32, with
which it is almost ABI compatible. Anything under powerpc32 that
requires hard FP should be in powerpc32/fpu.
> To me e500 needs a separate target to exploit its ISA. This can be
> associated with the eabi or as its own target. As in:
>
> --target=ppceabi-linux
> -with-cpu=e500
>
> This would imply ./sysdeps/powerpc/ppceabi/e500. Or
>
> --target=ppce500-linux
The target triplet powerpc-unknown-linux-gnuspe has been in use for a
couple of years.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery