Linux MIPS Architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com>
To: Dominic Sweetman <dom@algor.co.uk>
Cc: Matthew Dharm <mdharm@momenco.com>, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: MIPS64 status?
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:22:56 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020114152256.D29242@dea.linux-mips.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15426.48692.795968.819750@gladsmuir.algor.co.uk>; from dom@algor.co.uk on Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 11:17:08AM +0000

On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 11:17:08AM +0000, Dominic Sweetman wrote:

> o Very large virtual address spaces, using 64-bit pointer types.

Actually I only implemented support for something like 0.5TB.  As for
supercomputing that's peanuts (Like five years ago a customer requested
SGI to increase the per process size of the address space from 1TB, the
limit of the R4000 to 16TB, the limit of R10000 class processors.)

> o C "long" (and perhaps even "int") becomes 64-bit.

We follow the MIPS ABI which uses 32-bit ints and 64-bit longs.

> In such a 64-bit Linux system, though, you might still want to be able
> to run 32-bit applications with 32-bit pointers, int and long - either
> for compatibility or economy (32-bit data types make for a smaller
> program).  SGI do this in Irix: I don't know whether the 64-bit
> Linux/MIPS systems got around to it.

Yes.  The environment provided however is slightly different.  32-bit
software on the mips64 kernel is running with UX=1 thus 64-bit instructions
are allowed.

> There are other potentially useful combinations:
> 
> o A Linux where all machine-supported integer data types are 32-bit,

I don't want to support 32-bit char and short, sorry :-)

>   but capable of addressing physical memory outside of a 4Gbyte map.
>   (In practice, you need to use this kind of system to get outside of
>   a 512Mbyte map - so it's urgent).

I'd be working on this right now if you'd not be bothering me with email ;-)

>   Ralf says he has done this: it could be done without using any
>   64-bit operations, but it might be easier with them.

There are still MIPS32 systems which don't support 64-bit operations just
may have an address space of upto 36 bits.

> o A system using 32-bit pointers and 'long' throughout, but with
>   support for 'long long' 64-bit integer data types in registers.
>   
> o A system using 64-bit addressing within the kernel, but not for
>   applications. 
> 
> However, it's unlikely to make sense to do all of them!

Correct.  We may add support for the one or other code of these models
over time.

> > I suspect that this is very much a toolchain issue, as I don't think
> > gcc will generate 64-bit addressing code.
> 
> I suspect that the generic GNU toolchains are pretty buggy when you
> switch on 64-bit MIPS operation; but it's bug-fixes which are needed,
> not wholesale new features.

Actually in the past somebody was doing paid work to get the combo
g++ + SGI as + GNU ld to work for N32.  Due to the similarity of N32 and
N64 that already brought us quite a bit closer to N64 support.  That
still leaves alot of work including plenty of gas work.

> Politics: MIPS Technologies' advocacy for their "MIPS32" instruction
> set dialect in embedded systems means there are now some quite capable
> MIPS CPUs (eg Alchemy's 500Mhz integrated CPUs) which don't have
> 64-bit datapaths or arithmetic.  So casual dependence on 64-bit
> operations should probably be avoided.

I'm doing the best to avoid that.

  Ralf

  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-01-15  0:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-01-14  5:13 MIPS64 status? Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14  8:13 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2002-01-14 20:00   ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14 20:00     ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14 20:42     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2002-01-14 23:07       ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-15  0:08         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2002-01-15 20:59           ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-15 20:00         ` John Heil
2002-01-15 20:55           ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-16 18:55           ` Dominic Sweetman
2002-01-14 21:17     ` Dominic Sweetman
2002-01-14 21:17       ` Dominic Sweetman
2002-01-14 23:09       ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-14 11:17 ` Dominic Sweetman
2002-01-14 12:54   ` Kevin D. Kissell
2002-01-14 12:54     ` Kevin D. Kissell
2002-01-14 13:37     ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-01-14 23:23     ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-15 13:07       ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-01-14 23:22   ` Ralf Baechle [this message]
2002-01-15 19:11   ` Thiemo Seufer
2002-01-14 23:05 ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-14 23:25   ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14 23:25     ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-14 23:45     ` Ralf Baechle
2002-01-14 23:59     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2002-01-15  0:27       ` Matthew Dharm
2002-01-15  0:27         ` Matthew Dharm

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=20020114152256.D29242@dea.linux-mips.net \
    --to=ralf@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=dom@algor.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-mips@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=mdharm@momenco.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox