From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEE97138247 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2013 23:46:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C5234E0AED; Sun, 29 Dec 2013 23:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41428E0AED for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2013 23:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.3.7] (cpe-74-77-145-97.buffalo.res.rr.com [74.77.145.97]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: blueness) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4590533F68C for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2013 23:46:40 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52C0B497.60807@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 18:47:35 -0500 From: "Anthony G. Basile" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-mips@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-mips@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-mips@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-mips] Re: On MIPS using the same CHOST for all multilib ABIs References: <20131228235839.5bb0305a@gentoo.org> <52C096B8.1020302@gentoo.org> <20131229224806.66137df9@gentoo.org> <52C098C8.4000601@gentoo.org> <52C09985.9000709@opensource.dyc.edu> <52C09EA5.6070000@gentoo.org> <52C0A007.2000609@gentoo.org> <52C0A354.30808@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <52C0A354.30808@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 30b9e627-78da-404f-8b71-140f4ea172ab X-Archives-Hash: 106f728f5e0c1950ebde0206046bdc6e On 12/29/2013 05:33 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: > On 12/29/2013 10:19 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: >> On 12/29/2013 05:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: >>> On 12/29/2013 09:52 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: >>>> On 12/29/2013 04:48 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: >>>>> On 12/29/2013 09:48 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >>>>>> Dnia 2013-12-29, o godz. 16:40:08 >>>>>> Joshua Kinard napisał(a): >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 12/28/2013 5:58 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >>>>>>>> I've noticed today that mips uses the same CHOST value for all three >>>>>>>> ABIs it supports: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> arch/mips/mips64/multilib/make.defaults:CHOST_o32="${CHOST}" >>>>>>>> arch/mips/mips64/multilib/make.defaults:CHOST_n32=${CHOST} >>>>>>>> arch/mips/mips64/multilib/make.defaults:CHOST_n64=${CHOST} >>>>>>>> arch/mips/mipsel/mips64el/multilib/make.defaults:CHOST_o32="${CHOST}" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> arch/mips/mipsel/mips64el/multilib/make.defaults:CHOST_n32="${CHOST}" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> arch/mips/mipsel/mips64el/multilib/make.defaults:CHOST_n64="${CHOST}" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> Matt can probably vouch for this better, but the only two ABIs >>>>>>> affected by >>>>>>> this are n32 and n64. mips[el]-unknown-linux-gnu implies a 32-bit >>>>>>> big/little endian CHOST, which means the o32 ABI. >>>>>>> mips64[el]-unknown-linux-gnu means either n32 or n64. So no change >>>>>>> should >>>>>>> be needed for o32-based installs. >>>>>> Just to be clear: >>>>>> >>>>>> profiles/arch/mips/mipsel/mips64el/multilib/make.defaults: >>>>>> >>>>>> CHOST="mips64el-unknown-linux-gnu" >>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>>> >>>>>> CFLAGS_o32="-mabi=32" >>>>>> CHOST_o32="${CHOST}" >>>>>> >>>>>> CFLAGS_n32="-mabi=n32" >>>>>> CHOST_n32="${CHOST}" >>>>>> >>>>>> CFLAGS_n64="-mabi=64" >>>>>> CHOST_n64="${CHOST}" >>>>>> >>>>>> So in this case, o32 actually uses mips64el-unknown-linux-gnu, unless >>>>>> I'm missing something. >>>>>> >>>>> Yes all 3 ABIs use the same tuple. >>>>> >>>> I think people are missing Mike's point from earlier, which is that >>>> tuples label toolchains and a toolchain can support multiple abis. So >>>> for example, what would one do on a system which simultaneously has o32, >>>> n32 and n64? -gnuabi32n32n64 looks pretty crazy. >>>> >>> There is only one default ABI, so the toolchain should be named after >>> that. But that does not mean the toolchain can't build for different ABIs >>> >> No because that would confuse a toolchain which only supports n32 with >> one that supports o32/n32/n64. > Ah fair point > > Anyhow, Michał response is heading in >> the right direction where we'd have to use multiple tuple on multilib >> system support more than one lib. I'm still not sure where this will >> land us with respect to gnuconfig and other tuple parsing tools that >> bring in their own assumptions. >> > I would guess that if debian is using the -gnuabin32/64 suffix and it > works for them, then such tools would already understand such tuples. > Or their maintaining lots-o-patches which is what starts to happen when you deviate from standards. Anyhow, we should talk to them and see. -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] E-Mail : blueness@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA