On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 07:51:16AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 11:35:58AM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 05:27:11PM -0700, Don Lewis wrote: > > > > The system in question is my last i686 laptop, which I > > > > use for libm development and testing. Once I cannot use > > > > that laptop (whether hardware failure or inability to > > > > update the installed ports), I'll stop worrying about a > > > > functional libm on 32-bit hardware. > > > > > > As an aside, this sort of thing could be done in an i386 VM or maybe an > > > i386 jail on amd64 hardware. > > > > You do not need even a jail for this. Base cc -m32 works on amd64 for > > long time, and 32bit binaries can be executed from host environment, > > assuming all third-party libs are provided somewhere in the 32bit > > variant. > > > > The environment with regard to the hardware configuration should be > > identical to modern i386-arch machine with SSE2. Incompatibilities are > > considered as bugs and are usually fixed fast when reported. > > Does this required WITH_LIB32=yes in src.conf? Yes, but this is the default.
> > More concerning is that the FPU on i686 is set-up in npx to > use 53-bit precision instead of 64-bit. See x86/fpu.h where > there is a large comment and the settings > > #define __INITIAL_FPUCW__ 0x037F > #define __INITIAL_FPUCW_I386__ 0x127F > #define __INITIAL_NPXCW__ __INITIAL_FPUCW_I386__ > > Does cc -m32 on amd64 cause the amd64 fpu to act (exactly?) like > and i387? It is not cc -m32. Kernel sets up x87 FPU differently for 64 and 32bit processes. See ia32_setregs() where pcb is adjusted for 32bit, and r189423. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
