Re: RISC-V naming

[Mitchell Horne <mhorne%freebsd.org@localhost>]

On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 8:52 PM Tom Spindler (moof) <dogcow%babymeat.com@localhost> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 04:26:10PM -0700, Chris Hanson wrote:
> > Right now it looks like NetBSD’s very very preliminary RISC-V support calls the architecture “riscv,” while FreeBSD is using “riscv64” for their more-complete preliminary support.
> >
> > Should NetBSD switch to match it, for consistency?
> >
> > What’s Linux using?
>
> https://github.com/buildroot/buildroot/blob/master/arch/Config.in.riscv
> would seem to imply they use riscv64 (and riscv32); we currently have
> MACHINE=riscv           MACHINE_ARCH=riscv64    ALIAS=riscv64 DEFAULT
> quoth build.sh
>
> What exactly should change? It strikes me as being akin to the powerpc
> situation where we have sys/arch/powerpc, which contains files for both
> 32 and 64 bit ppc (and as build.sh puts it,
> MACHINE=evbppc          MACHINE_ARCH=powerpc64  ALIAS=evbppc64
> )
>

FreeBSD uses MACHINE=riscv, MACHINE_ARCH=riscv64 as well, so it would
seem what NetBSD has is already consistent, at least from the POV of
the build system.

FreeBSD doesn't have an aim to support 32-bit RISC-V at the moment, so
the terms riscv and riscv64 are used somewhat interchangeably,
depending where you look. On the download page, for example, it is
listed as "riscv64", to be precise about the exact MACHINE_ARCH that
was built. We also support a soft-float "riscv64sf" target, which is
less popular.

Cheers,
Mitchell