From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rob Landley Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 08:23:33 +0000 Subject: Re: [musl] SH sigcontext ABI is broken Message-Id: <558A6905.7010406@landley.net> List-Id: References: <20150619070912.GA15025@brightrain.aerifal.cx> In-Reply-To: <20150619070912.GA15025@brightrain.aerifal.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org On 06/24/2015 09:10 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jun 2015, Rich Felker wrote: > >> Nominally SH3 support remains in both the kernel and glibc. If it can >> be established that multiple parties agree that there's really no one >> left who cares about the old no-FPU sigcontext ABI on SH3, I will be >> all for dropping it and unifying sigcontext. > > Note that right now we have BE and LE versions of *three* ABIs for SH in > glibc (SH3 soft-float, SH4 soft-float, SH4 hard-float) (and as noted in > this discussion, right now each would only work properly on a kernel with > the corresponding configuration). See > . > > We can, of course, choose to declare processor or ABI variants no longer > supported in glibc, much like we desupported i386 in glibc (requiring i486 > or later - albeit the official desupporting happening several years after > i386 would no longer build) or removed support for non-EABI ARM. But > since we don't have an SH maintainer at all in glibc at present, it's > harder to make such a decision (whereas if an architecture maintainer > decided some variants were no longer relevant, they could just remove > support - make those variants give a configure-time error - in the absence > of someone objecting and willing to take over maintaining support for > those variants). > > I think the next glibc change likely to require action from each > architecture's maintainer to avoid breaking the build may be Adhemerval's > cancellation changes - so if no-one comes forward as SH maintainer to at > least update SH for those changes when they are ready to go in, the build > for SH will be broken and that will indicate, as per > , that it may > be time to remove the port from glibc. Eh, ping me when that happens. I may at least do necessary changes to keep it building. (Although I can only test glibc on qemu-system-sh4.) Rob