Re: kern/60819

["Joe Groff via gnats" <gnats-admin%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR kern/60819; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Joe Groff <arcata%gmail.com@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Cc: kern-bug-people%netbsd.org@localhost, gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost, netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Subject: Re: kern/60819
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 12:04:22 -0700

 --0000000000009fbd20065c8fbc11
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 11:55=E2=80=AFAM Yuri Honegger via gnats <
 gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
 
 > The following reply was made to PR kern/60819; it has been noted by GNATS=
 .
 >
 > From: Yuri Honegger <yuri.honegger%icloud.com@localhost>
 > To: "gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost" <gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost>
 > Cc:
 > Subject: Re: kern/60819
 > Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 20:53:09 +0200
 >
 >  Per my understanding, you=3DE2=3D80=3D99re only supposed to have one CPU=
 _ARM* =3D
 >  definition per config.=3D20
 >
 >  In general, each configurations only support one arm architecture level.=
  =3D
 >  INTEGRATOR_CP is a bit special in that is is a simulator target, so =3D
 >  swapping out CPU cores is possible. The current NetBSD is not built for =
 =3D
 >  supporting multiple architecture level at the same time. Even if we fix =
 =3D
 >  this particular issue, just by searching "defined(CPU_ARM" you can find =
 =3D
 >  many similar issues like the one you reported.
 >
 >  How I read the INTEGRATOR_CP cpu options is that you are probably =3D
 >  supposed to comment out the ones you are not using. We should probably =
 =3D
 >  describe that a bit more explicitly though.
 >
 >  Would you mind testing ARM9 with the higher CPU_ARMX commented out =3D
 >  before I commit such a hint?
 
 
 Thanks for the quick reply, Yuri! I can confirm that the kernel works fine
 built with only CPU_ARM9 enabled. If it's intended that only one CPU_ARM*
 be enabled at once, that makes sense. I wonder if it would make sense for
 the build system to assert that so it's clear that the config needs to be
 modified.
 
 --0000000000009fbd20065c8fbc11
 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 <div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote g=
 mail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, Sep 28,=
  2026 at 11:55=E2=80=AFAM Yuri Honegger via gnats &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:gna=
 ts-admin%netbsd.org@localhost">gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockq=
 uote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1p=
 x solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The following reply was made to =
 PR kern/60819; it has been noted by GNATS.<br>
 <br>
 From: Yuri Honegger &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:yuri.honegger%icloud.com@localhost"; target=
 =3D"_blank">yuri.honegger%icloud.com@localhost</a>&gt;<br>
 To: &quot;<a href=3D"mailto:gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost"; target=3D"_blank">gnats-=
 bugs%netbsd.org@localhost</a>&quot; &lt;gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost&gt;<br>
 Cc: <br>
 Subject: Re: kern/60819<br>
 Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 20:53:09 +0200<br>
 <br>
 =C2=A0Per my understanding, you=3DE2=3D80=3D99re only supposed to have one =
 CPU_ARM* =3D<br>
 =C2=A0definition per config.=3D20<br>
 <br>
 =C2=A0In general, each configurations only support one arm architecture lev=
 el. =3D<br>
 =C2=A0INTEGRATOR_CP is a bit special in that is is a simulator target, so =
 =3D<br>
 =C2=A0swapping out CPU cores is possible. The current NetBSD is not built f=
 or =3D<br>
 =C2=A0supporting multiple architecture level at the same time. Even if we f=
 ix =3D<br>
 =C2=A0this particular issue, just by searching &quot;defined(CPU_ARM&quot; =
 you can find =3D<br>
 =C2=A0many similar issues like the one you reported.<br>
 <br>
 =C2=A0How I read the INTEGRATOR_CP cpu options is that you are probably =3D=
 <br>
 =C2=A0supposed to comment out the ones you are not using. We should probabl=
 y =3D<br>
 =C2=A0describe that a bit more explicitly though.<br>
 <br>
 =C2=A0Would you mind testing ARM9 with the higher CPU_ARMX commented out =
 =3D<br>
 =C2=A0before I commit such a hint?</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Thanks f=
 or the quick reply, Yuri! I can confirm that the kernel works fine built wi=
 th only CPU_ARM9 enabled. If it&#39;s intended that only one CPU_ARM* be en=
 abled at once, that makes sense. I wonder if it would make sense for the bu=
 ild system to assert that so it&#39;s clear that the config needs to be mod=
 ified.</div></div></div>
 
 --0000000000009fbd20065c8fbc11--