From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBEE1385DC00; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 15:27:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org BBEE1385DC00 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=msuchanek@suse.de X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21747AF39; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 15:27:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2020 17:27:24 +0200 From: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Such=E1nek?= To: Daniel Kolesa Cc: Joseph Myers , libc-alpha@sourceware.org, eery@paperfox.es, musl@lists.openwall.com, Will Springer , Palmer Dabbelt via binutils , via libc-dev , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: ppc64le and 32-bit LE userland compatibility Message-ID: <20200602152724.GU25173@kitsune.suse.cz> References: <2047231.C4sosBPzcN@sheen> <20200602142337.GS25173@kitsune.suse.cz> <3aeb6dfe-ae23-42f9-ac23-16be6b54a850@www.fastmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3aeb6dfe-ae23-42f9-ac23-16be6b54a850@www.fastmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: binutils@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Binutils mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 15:27:29 -0000 On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 05:13:25PM +0200, Daniel Kolesa wrote: > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020, at 16:23, Michal Suchánek wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 01:40:23PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > > > On Tue, 2 Jun 2020, Daniel Kolesa wrote: > > > > > > > not be limited to being just userspace under ppc64le, but should be > > > > runnable on a native kernel as well, which should not be limited to any > > > > particular baseline other than just PowerPC. > > > > > > This is a fairly unusual approach to bringing up a new ABI. Since new > > > ABIs are more likely to be used on new systems rather than switching ABI > > > on an existing installation, and since it can take quite some time for all > > > the software support for a new ABI to become widely available in > > > distributions, people developing new ABIs are likely to think about what > > > new systems are going to be relevant in a few years' time when working out > > > the minimum hardware requirements for the new ABI. (The POWER8 minimum > > > for powerpc64le fits in with that, for example.) > > That means that you cannot run ppc64le on FSL embedded CPUs (which lack > > the vector instructions in LE mode). Which may be fine with you but > > other people may want to support these. Can't really say if that's good > > idea or not but I don't foresee them going away in a few years, either. > > well, ppc64le already cannot be run on those, as far as I know (I don't think it's possible to build ppc64le userland without VSX in any configuration) What hardware are you targetting then? I did not notice anything specific mentioned in the thread. Naturally on POWER the first cpu that has LE support is POWER8 so you can count on all other POWER8 features to be present. With other architecture variants the situation is different. Thanks Michal