Re: aarch64: a port, or a MACHINE_ARCH under evbarm?

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost> writes:

> 	build.sh -m evbarm64
>
> should do. It is an alias (see the table in build.sh) and does:

Thanks - things are much clearer now.

Part of the trouble is that "port" is used somewhat loosely, to refer to
a sys/arch subdirectory, even when that name is not a MACHINE.  I've
tried to explain this:

https://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/ (see new table at end)
https://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/evbarm/
https://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/evbarm/raspberry_pi/

So more questions:

  Am I confused about xen/aarch64 not being ports in the same sense as
  the others, in that they are not a MACHINE (uname -m) value?

  Does aarch64 really work on RPI3?  I know people are talking about it
  on 64-bit pinebooks.

  On RPI3, if aarch64 works, is there anything that needs to be done
  with bootcode.bin, other than installing from -current (which I
  realize has newer firmware than 8)?

  aarch64 seems to mean "aarch64 instruction set family, armv8
  achitecture".  Is that right, and is there a plan for evolution?  It
  seems there are a variety of CPU architectures (armv5, armv6, armv7,
  etc.) for aarch32.

  Is there a armv8 MACHINE_ARCH (for aarch32)?  Or does our toolchain
  not have this, or are there not enough instruction set additions for
  it to make any sense?