Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add RISC-V support to make.cross #7

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

palmer-dabbelt
Copy link

The ARCH name in Linux for RISC-V is "riscv", but the toolchain tuples
are "riscv64" and "riscv32". Arnd recently updated the crosstool builds
at kernel.org to contain RISC-V toolchains, but without a small change
to teach make.cross about the RISC-V tuple conventions this doesn't
quite get glued together.

This patch simply adds a rename rule for the RISC-V toolchains that are
now availiable. This just always uses the riscv64 toolchain, as the
only difference between the RISC-V tuples are the default march target
(which Linux doesn't rely on) and, for non-multilib toolchians, what C
library is installed (there's none on the binaries we're fetching).

Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt [email protected]

Fengguang Wu and others added 3 commits November 10, 2017 17:39
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <[email protected]>
The ARCH name in Linux for RISC-V is "riscv", but the toolchain tuples
are "riscv64" and "riscv32".  Arnd recently updated the crosstool builds
at kernel.org to contain RISC-V toolchains, but without a small change
to teach make.cross about the RISC-V tuple conventions this doesn't
quite get glued together.

This patch simply adds a rename rule for the RISC-V toolchains that are
now availiable.  This just always uses the riscv64 toolchain, as the
only difference between the RISC-V tuples are the default march target
(which Linux doesn't rely on) and, for non-multilib toolchians, what C
library is installed (there's none on the binaries we're fetching).

Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants