Control: tag -1 - moreinfo On Mon, 2016-05-23 at 11:14 +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote: > > > > Control: tag -1 moreinfo > > > > On Sun, 2016-05-22 at 22:52 +0800, YunQiang Su wrote: > > > > > > Package: src:linux > > > Version: 4.5 - 4.6 > > > > > > Hi, this patch add mipsn32 and mipsn32el support and also add > > > 6 MIPS r6 architectures. > > > > > > mipsn32 and mipsn32el have same flavors with mips64 and mips64el. > > Since we have multiarch it is not necessary to duplicate kernel > > packages with identical configurations in multiple Debian > > architectures. All the N32 architectures should be used in multiarch > > configurations together with the corresponding 64-bit architectures. > > (The same should be true for O32 architectures, but that won't happen > > until the corresponding 64-bit architectures are in the main archive.) > I won't push N32 architecture to the main Debian archive. > I just wish the code in the upstream, so I will not have to maintain another > git repo, and merge patches again and again. > > In fact, I may build a standalone N32 private archive in future.
I will still insist that N32 architectures do not have their own kernels, only userland packages (linux-libc-dev, linux-kbuild, linux- perf, etc.) > > [...] > > > > > > --- a/debian/config/defines > > > +++ b/debian/config/defines > > > @@ -13,8 +13,16 @@ arches: > > > m68k > > > mips > > > mipsel > > > + mipsn32 > > > + mipsn32el > > > mips64 > > > mips64el > > > + mipsr6 > > > + mipsr6el > > > + mipsn32r6 > > > + mipsn32r6el > > > + mips64r6 > > > + mips64r6el > > [...] > > > > This is ridiculous. 12 different Debian architectures for MIPS?! If > > you want to make ARM look like a better choice, this sort of > > fragmentation of binary compatibility is a good way to do it. > > > > Why are there new Debian architectures specifically for R6, given that > > Debian architectures correspond to ABIs and not specific CPU > > requirements (e.g.. i386's CPU requirements have graudally moved up > > from 386 to 686-class)? > Please see the talk on > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=807340 > > MIPS R6 is a new release of MIPS32 and MIPS64. > R6 is not fully compatible with R5-, > as it adds and *removes* some instructions, and add emulation > of the removed instructions in kernel, > so old binaries can still run on new R6 CPUs. That's quite amazing. But it's even worse that that - the architecture reference you linked to says some of the removed instructions' encodings have been reassigned to new instructions. This seems to make emulation impossible. > While for the new CPUs, we still wish they can have their own architectures. I suppose they will have to. Ben. > In future, we may add them to the official Debian archive, > while now, it is just a prepare. -- Ben Hutchings You can't have everything. Where would you put it?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
