x86_64 port and BSP (GSoC 2018)
Sebastian Huber
sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
Mon May 14 12:38:42 UTC 2018
On 14/05/18 14:34, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, May 14, 2018, 7:12 AM Sebastian Huber
> <sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
> <mailto:sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de>> wrote:
>
> On 14/05/18 14:09, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > On Mon, May 14, 2018, 7:07 AM Sebastian Huber
> > <sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
> <mailto:sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de>
> > <mailto:sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
> <mailto:sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de>>> wrote:
> >
> > On 14/05/18 13:14, Amaan Cheval wrote:
> > > Regarding naming, how about we settle on something like
> > > "bsps/amd64/amd64_generic", borrowing from how the riscv
> target is
> > > structured?
> >
> > In case you want to name the new architecture "amd64", then
> the tool
> > chain should be renamed as well, currently we have
> > x86_64-rtems5-gcc, etc.
> >
> >
> > The target is picked after the GNU target name. We have always
> agreed
> > with the GNU target name.
>
> Ok, makes sense. Will the new stuff support the 32-bit instruction
> set?
>
>
> I have no idea. On a native Linux or BSD toolset, does -m32 produce
> the same 32 bit ABI code as i386-elf?
>
> I am pretty sure our x86_64 toolset does not have the 32 bit multilibs.
>
> In fairness, even though x86_64 appears to be the canonical name,
> maybe amd64 is an acceptable alias. Internally, the tools use x86_64
> though.
>
> I would prefer to stick to the canonical name internally.
All targets use the canonical name up to now (riscv is a small exception
with riscv32 and riscv64). I would not make an exception for the current
Intel architecture invented by AMD. Either name it x86 (if there is a
potential 32-bit support, why would you use it?) or x86_64.
--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail : sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
PGP : Public key available on request.
Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
More information about the devel
mailing list