From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6828EC433EF for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 16:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 041A56109E for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 16:12:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 041A56109E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen0n.name Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:57722 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mSiO0-0003py-VJ for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 12:12:48 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42416) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mSiKp-0000w4-DV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 12:09:31 -0400 Received: from [115.28.160.31] (port=53514 helo=mailbox.box.xen0n.name) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mSiKm-0004Hh-6v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 12:09:30 -0400 Received: from [192.168.9.172] (unknown [101.88.29.172]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailbox.box.xen0n.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 88C0B600FF; Wed, 22 Sep 2021 00:09:20 +0800 (CST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=xen0n.name; s=mail; t=1632240560; bh=ok70pgASaD0gEMaQUOYdPcamIUfxDdb5BNehopLef7k=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=XYULna6ToxR6uLgmU2hX2atFVaWtkCLzQ+WF+Ovt2UWzdLukwbtJHlBtEQ2sr1W6A RRDlZd1UsYytwxImnoG6lC2UWOCw3aezWtnnsK68VO3aLUnyTaRVRLfqTWYS/nsfim k+lUIk1/ShoF7b0KGrRJiAqt67RZ4oLl2oxXDogQ= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 00:09:19 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:94.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/94.0a1 Subject: Re: [PATCH 28/30] configure, meson.build: Mark support for 64-bit LoongArch hosts Content-Language: en-US To: Peter Maydell , Richard Henderson References: <20210920080451.408655-1-git@xen0n.name> <20210920080451.408655-29-git@xen0n.name> From: WANG Xuerui In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 115.28.160.31 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=115.28.160.31; envelope-from=i.qemu@xen0n.name; helo=mailbox.box.xen0n.name X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: QEMU Developers Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Hi Peter, On 9/21/21 22:42, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Mon, 20 Sept 2021 at 18:25, Richard Henderson > wrote: >> On 9/20/21 1:04 AM, WANG Xuerui wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: WANG Xuerui >> Be consistent with loongarch or loongarch64 everywhere. >> >> If there's no loongarch32, and never will be, then there's probably no point in keeping >> the '64' suffix. > What does Linux 'uname -m' call the architecture, and what is the > name in the gcc triplet? Generally I think we should prefer to follow > those precedents (which hopefully don't point in different directions) > rather than making up our own architecture names. uname -m says "loongarch64", the GNU triple arch name is also "loongarch64". I'd say it's similar to the situation of RISC-V or MIPS; except that a Linux port to the 32-bit variant of LoongArch might not happen, precluding a QEMU port. I think cpu=loongarch64 but ARCH=loongarch should be okay; at least it's better than, say, the Go language or Gentoo, where this architecture is named "loong64" and "loong"; or the binutils internals where it's "larch". > > thanks > -- PMM