Re: [Re: [patch] Add NetBSD/hppa target]

[coypu%sdf.org@localhost]

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:56:37PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Riccardo Mottola <riccardo.mottola%libero.it@localhost> writes:
> > coypu%sdf.org@localhost wrote:
> >> Any reason to not use the PA 2.0 ISA?   I'm virtually certain we
> >> supported the 32bit ABI running on PA 2.0 hardware in hpbsd (which is
> >> where the netbsd PA code is ultimately derived from).   I'd be really
> >> surprised if there's any PA1.1 hardware running anywhere, though there's
> >> certainly some PA2.0 hardware out in the wild.
> 
> > I think most older 32bit workstations have 1.1 ISA ?
> 
> Sure, the question is whether anybody still cares?  Personally,
> I'd be way more interested in being able to run NetBSD on my C360
> (PA-8500) than the PA-7100 that's still gathering dust somewhere
> around here.  I think HP stopped making the 32-bit machines around
> the mid-90s.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane

The existing norm for architectures is that without any parameters, it
will work for ~all machines. If someone wants optimized defaults, they
have the option of passing a flag during builds.

Similarly, i386 compilers will build i486 code, and not assume SSE
exists.

That one is probably least likely to be done. I am including it for the
sake of completeness.

It's mostly the decision of the hppa portmaster, but if he doesn't
respond in some amount of time I'll ask to leave things as is. It
already works for us, and should be fine.

We can change both upstream and our local GCC copy if we want to
change ABIs.