From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] Question about 64Bit kernel and 32Bit applications
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 19:49:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121002194921.5fb92a46@skate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMJ=MEe-AfvoQ9tx5z3Wo2=w3tTbsorqCmcSp6trkxMmwpusZg@mail.gmail.com>
Ronny,
Please keep the list Cc'ed for Buildroot related discussions.
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 19:43:46 +0200, Ronny Meeus wrote:
> The toolchain is available from cnusers.org.
> You need to register first but once registered (can take 1 day or so), go to:
> Downloads -> Downloads for registered users -> Octeon Software
> development kit -> SDK 2.3
> This is the complete octeon SDK including an installed toochain, Linux
> source code, example code, uboot etc for the Cavium reference boards.
> This is the direct link:
> http://www.cnusers.org/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=32&func=fileinfo&id=165
Ok, thanks, I'll have a look. However, if registration is required,
integrating the toolchain in Buildroot will be difficult.
> > And my opinion is that we should not try to support this. Unless I'm
> > missing something, it is a really bizarre use case, and adding support
> > for it would create an horrible additional complexity in Buildroot.
>
> In my opinion this usecase is not so bizarre. New applications can be
> compiled in 64Bit mode while legacy applications (coming from a 32Bit
> machine) can be compiled with the -mabi=n32 compiler option. If we
> would not do this and just compile in 64Bit mode, the impact in the
> application can be big (size of several types changes from 4 to 8
> bytes, impact on the size of data-types, alignment issues etc).
>
> What about the support to compile the userland with a different ABI
> than the kernel?
Sure. Do you know what changes we should do to make this possible?
> > The change you did for libfuse cannot be integrated: it is MIPS
> > specific, and we also have no way of specifying on a per-package basis
> > whether it should be built for 32 bits or 64 bits.
>
> I just included this code to give you an indication of the changes I
> needed to do ...
Sure, that's the way I took your code, I just highlighted the reason
why we couldn't accept this type of modification.
Thanks!
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-02 17:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-02 13:57 [Buildroot] Question about 64Bit kernel and 32Bit applications Ronny Meeus
2012-10-02 14:02 ` Thomas Petazzoni
[not found] ` <CAMJ=MEe-AfvoQ9tx5z3Wo2=w3tTbsorqCmcSp6trkxMmwpusZg@mail.gmail.com>
2012-10-02 17:49 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2012-10-02 18:39 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2012-10-02 19:21 ` Ronny Meeus
2012-10-02 20:46 ` Ronny Meeus
2012-10-03 15:18 ` Ronny Meeus
2012-10-04 9:08 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2012-10-04 10:56 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2012-10-04 11:44 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121002194921.5fb92a46@skate \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.