|
From: | WANG Xuerui |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH 28/30] configure, meson.build: Mark support for 64-bit LoongArch hosts |
Date: | Tue, 21 Sep 2021 15:24:04 +0800 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:94.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/94.0a1 |
Hi Philippe, On 9/21/21 14:59, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 9/21/21 08:02, WANG Xuerui wrote:On 9/21/21 01:23, Richard Henderson wrote:On 9/20/21 1:04 AM, WANG Xuerui wrote:Signed-off-by: WANG Xuerui <git@xen0n.name> --- configure | 4 +++- meson.build | 4 +++- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)If there's no loongarch32, and never will be, then there's probably no point in keeping the '64' suffix.The loongarch32 tuple will most certainly come into existence some time in the future, but probably bare-metal-only and without a Linux port AFAIK. That's a point the Loongson people and I didn't communicate well, apologizes for that. (While we're at it, the reserved "loongarchx32" which is x32/n32-like, most likely will never exist.)Are you trying to beat MIPS at their ABI complexity? /s
Hah, I'm not Loongson employee so maybe I'm not in the best position to answer this ;-)
But from an outsider's perspective, the Loongson people obviously reserved things upfront like a multi-millionaire, then suddenly realized they only have ~500 people on board, developers even less; so they did the Right Thing(TM), only later, to drop x32 altogether and focus their energy on bare-metal use cases for their 32-bit-only chips.
Plus, LoongArch is strictly little-endian, and only one baseline ISA revision is published so far, so IMO it can never beat MIPS in terms of combinatorial ABI possibilities. Maybe RISC-V have a chance? ;-)
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |