Re: state of 64 bit support

[Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>]

On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 05:28:18PM +0200, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jun 2003, David Kesselring wrote:
> 
> > I've been trying to get a 64 bit compiler working for a 5kc/5kf core,
> > searching the net for info, and following this list for the last couple of
> > weeks. I have not been able to get some basic questions answered and I
> > hope that some of you can help me.
> 
>  With the above statement I assume you want to have a compiler suitable
> for a kernel build only (which is easier to get running) and you do not
> need to do 64-bit userland builds (which is tougher).  And that you want a
> cross-compiler.
> 
> > First what is the current status of mips 5k 64bit little-endian support
> > for gcc? Do I have to use 2.95/2.96? I don't think there is a linux binary
> > but if you know of one I'd love the link. I have been unsuccessful getting
> > this built.
> 
>  There are a few gcc 2.95.x i386/Linux LE binary RPM packages available at
> my site, but they have preliminary R4k workarounds applied which have
> disadvantageous side effects for later processors.  Your best bet is to
> get an RPM source package, disable R4k patches and rebuild. 
> 
> > On the web, there is a howto to build a mipsel gcc 3.2. Does 3.2 support
> > 64 bit mips? Has anyone gotten it to work?
> 
>  If going for version 3.x, you probably want to get 3.3.  I can't say if
> it supports MIPS64/Linux without patching -- probably yes.

More or less yes (kernel space).  Userspace went in to 3.4.

> 
> > Also linux. From my understanding, kernel 2.4.20 has the latest patches
> > for mips32 and mips64. Is that a valid codebase?
> 
>  Up till now most development was done based on 2.4.x, but Ralf has just
> finished updating 2.5.x, so you can select the version that suits you
> best.

... But you have to get it from the linux-mips.org CVS, not from
kernel.org!  Just clarifying.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer