This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org mailing list for the systemtap project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 08/25/2009 08:33 AM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Hi - > > We need to clear up our use of the generic term "architecture" in > stap, as visible to scripts %( arch %) and the build system (-a foo or > -B ARCH=foo). The linux kernel has a less fuzzy meaning for it than > we have had, roughly as embodied by the SUBARCH computation in the > top level Makefile: > > SUBARCH := $(shell uname -m | sed -e s/i.86/i386/ -e s/sun4u/sparc64/ \ > -e s/arm.*/arm/ -e s/sa110/arm/ \ > -e s/s390x/s390/ -e s/parisc64/parisc/ \ > -e s/ppc.*/powerpc/ -e s/mips.*/mips/ \ > -e s/sh[234].*/sh/ ) > > > Whereas we in stap land have used uname(2)'s machine, or approximating > "uname -i". But neither of those matches SUBARCH/ARCH, for cases such > as s390[x], powerpc[64], and others. The current systemtap git code > breaks on these latter ones. > > So, what to do? A few options: > > - Revert some of my cross-arch code, so as to avoid passing ARCH=foo to > the build system if the user hasn't attempted to override the default. > This would preserve the inconsistency. Tapsets would not exist for > where "uname -m" gives wordy labels like "armv5tejl". > > - Add the same SUBARCH-flattening hack to systemtap, so that we think > in terms of the same "arch" value as the kernel. (I don't think > there exists any kernel API or /proc filesystem that gives us this > string back at run time!) So "ppc64" would become plain "powerpc", > "s390x"->"s390", "arm5tejl"->"arm", and so on. Tapsets would have > to be moved around a little more, and third-party scripts that use > the old %( arch %) names would have to change. > > I'm leaning for #2, but I'm looking for more alternatives or advice. I've got a couple of thoughts here: - Are we planning on extending '%arch' (or perhaps adding '%user_arch') to tell the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit user exes? - I'd probably go with solution #2, but also provide "aliases" for the old names (assuming that's possible). -- David Smith dsmith@redhat.com Red Hat http://www.redhat.com 256.217.0141 (direct) 256.837.0057 (fax)
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |