Creating armv7 MACHINE_ARCH

[Warner Losh]

Me too:

offence &= ~(TAKEN | INTENDED);

:)

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Russell Haley <russ.haley at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ha ha I should have used a bitwise or in that.
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Virgin Mobile network.
> *From: *Russell Haley
> *Sent: *Monday, June 12, 2017 8:46 AM
> *To: *Warner Losh
> *Cc: *freebsd-arm at freebsd.org
> *Subject: *Re: Creating armv7 MACHINE_ARCH
>
> No offense meant, no offense take: glad for a passionate answer!
>
> Russ
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Virgin Mobile network.
> *From: *Warner Losh
> *Sent: *Monday, June 12, 2017 8:39 AM
> *To: *Russell Haley
> *Cc: *freebsd-arm at freebsd.org
> *Subject: *Re: Creating armv7 MACHINE_ARCH
>
> Clearly, we woke up one day and realized Ian was right? And he's only been
> saying it since pre R11 since that was the first release that supported it.
> There was no armv6 support in 10. Ask a snarky question, get a snarky
> answer...
>
> What's changed is that the port has gone from being mainly used by people
> that had an rpi that supported a bunch of other platforms (including Ian's
> iMX6) to a port that's used primarily by armv7 machines (including the
> rpi2) that also happens to support the rpi (which is the only !armv7
> platform). When Ian started saying it, rpi was one of the better supported
> platforms as well. Now with all the Allwinner support, improved iMX6
> support, and the rpi2 being armv7, we are now in a situation where most
> users and most of the good support is on that platform. What's also changed
> is Andrew's work on having a GENERIC kernel. We'd have a GENERIC one for
> ARMv6 too: It's the RPI config :).
>
> Plus, we aren't quite doing what Ian wanted. He wanted a full rename. The
> proposal on the able is to add an armv7 TARGET_ARCH in 12. Not to rename or
> remove armv6. Sadly, that will still be there since the RPI foundation
> keeps finding new ways to repackage the rpi into new boards that are just
> too cheap to ignore.
>
> Warner
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Russell Haley <russ.haley at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sorry for the top post.
>>
>> Hasn't Ian Lapore been saying this since pre R10?‎ I seems to remember
>> people doing backflips to get around this‎ heading up to that release and
>> it was considered to much effort. Can I ask what has changed?
>>
>> Russ
>>
>> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Virgin Mobile network.
>>   Original Message
>> From: Warner Losh
>> Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 1:27 PM
>> To: freebsd-arm at freebsd.org
>> Subject: Creating armv7 MACHINE_ARCH
>>
>> While the kernel doesn't really need an armv7 support, there will be a
>> better match to other systems if we create a armv7 MACHINE_ARCH. This will
>> be in addition to the armv6 MACHINE_ARCH we have today. This will allow us
>> to create a package set optimized for armv7 as well as armv6. While it is
>> true the RPI 1 is the only system that needs armv6 binaries, it's quite
>> popular and the Raspberry Pi folks keep creating new variants with the
>> same
>> chip. It would also let us get the package stuff spun up and working
>> before
>> we mess with armv6.
>>
>> This would also separate the fate of armv6 and armv7 support at a later
>> time, but the weak consensus I've heard appears to be that the time isn't
>> yet right to discuss retiring armv6 support...
>>
>> Warner
>> _______________________________________________
>> freebsd-arm at freebsd.org mailing list
>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>>
>
>
>
>