From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Danny Gale Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 12:24:24 -0700 Subject: [Buildroot] powerpc64 support In-Reply-To: <52EA9EE2.80807@zacarias.com.ar> References: <52EA95DB.70504@coloradoengineeringinc.com> <52EA9EE2.80807@zacarias.com.ar> Message-ID: <52EAA6E8.7000805@coloradoengineeringinc.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Gustavo, Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. Would it be preferred to add to Config.in.powerpc, or create Config.in.powerpc64? Thanks, Danny On 01/30/2014 11:50 AM, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > On 01/30/2014 03:11 PM, Danny Gale wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> We have used buildroot in the past to build filesystems for 32-bit >> powerpc's with great success. Our newest boards are using 64-bit >> powerpc's, however. Using menuconfig with buildroot 2013-11, I don't see >> a target architecture for powerpc64. Is there support for 64-bit powerpc's? >> >> We're using an externally-generated toolchain, which is compiled for >> 64-bit powerpc's, specifically the e6500 core >> (powerpc64-e6500-linux-gnu-). Will selecting powerpc but using this >> 64-bit toolchain generate 64-bit filesystems? I don't see the e6500 >> listed as a supported Target Architecture Variant either, but I believe >> it can run 32-bit code generated for the e500 cores. > Hi Danny. > That's because nobody did the necessary modifications yet. > You'd need to add 64 bit cores/defines into arch/Config.in.ppc and > arch/Config.in, and adjust all the available toolchain options for them. > IIRC the e6500 can execute e500mc code, but not e500v* since the later > use SPE instead of a normal FPU (which i think the e6500 doesn't carry > over, using the classic & altivec IIRC). > It may be possible to build internal toolchains too given the appropiate > component (binutils/gcc) versions. > uClibc definitely doesn't handle ppc64, so that would just leave > glibc/eglibc in the libc department. > Regards. >