[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140716225158.GC9928@port70.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 00:51:59 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add or1k (OpenRISC 1000) architecture port
* Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi> [2014-07-16 20:55:57 +0300]:
> With the exception of a fenv implementation, the port is fully featured.
i assume or1k is soft-float only
(for a working soft-float fenv musl will need cooperation with libgcc)
> The port has been tested in or1ksim, the golden reference functional
> simulator for OpenRISC 1000.
> It passes all libc-test tests (except the math tests that
> requires a fenv implementation).
nice
can i ask what version of the kernel headers did you use
to prepare the bits headers?
> +++ b/arch/or1k/bits/syscall.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,523 @@
...
> +#define __NR_kcmp 272
> +#define __NR_finit_module 273
> +#define __NR_syscalls 274
other archs don't define __NR_syscalls for the number of syscalls
(but it does not hurt)
...
> +#define SYS_kcmp __NR_kcmp
> +#define SYS_finit_module __NR_finit_module
> +#define SYS_syscalls __NR_syscalls
the syscall numbers after this are out-of-order
(this will be confusing when new syscalls will be added)
i'd prefer if __NR_* and SYS_* were in the same order
(can be fixed after the great commit)
> +#define SYS_fcntl64 __NR_fcntl64
> +#define SYS_statfs64 __NR_statfs64
> +#define SYS_fstatfs64 __NR_fstatfs64
...
> +++ b/configure
> @@ -250,6 +250,7 @@ x86_64-x32*|x32*|x86_64*x32) ARCH=x32 ;;
> x86_64*) ARCH=x86_64 ;;
> mips*) ARCH=mips ;;
> microblaze*) ARCH=microblaze ;;
> +or1k*) ARCH=or1k ;;
i assume or1k is the official name all toolchain things use
> +++ b/include/elf.h
> @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ typedef struct {
> #define EM_MN10300 89
> #define EM_MN10200 90
> #define EM_PJ 91
> -#define EM_OPENRISC 92
> +#define EM_OR1K 92
glibc has EM_OPENRISC defined since 2001 and
the binutils i have here seems to use the same name
is this change official?
> +#define R_OR1K_NONE 0
> +#define R_OR1K_32 1
> +#define R_OR1K_16 2
...
ditto, i don't see these in binutils, but i guess
it's a new elf platform
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
