[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: aarch64: a port, or a MACHINE_ARCH under evbarm?
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)
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?
Main Index |
Thread Index |