Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Inline helpers into Rust without full LTO
"Russell King (Oracle)" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.uml.devel,gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel,gmane.linux.kbuild.devel,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.kernel.mm,gmane.linux.kernel.rust |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 03:31:26PM +0100, Christian Schrefl wrote: > Hi Miguel, > > On 3/26/26 2:47 PM, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 11:10 AM Alice Ryhl <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I noticed that the Makefile currently uses the arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi > >> target. It should probably not be -linux target to avoid this? Probably > >> it should just be armv7a-none-eabi, right? We gate HAVE_RUST on > >> CPU_32v7, so we should not need to consider the other variants. > > > > I think Christian tried several targets back then and eventually > > picked that one. > > > > Christian: what was the reason to pick the `-linux-` one? e.g. was > > there something you wanted to rely on that target spec that you > > couldn't enable or disable via `rustc` flags or similar? > > It should probably be fine to use armv7a-none-eabi. I've mostly used > arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi I'm not sure if this is still true, but I believe it used to be the case that the -linux-gnueabi target has one behaviour for enums (fixed size) whereas -none-eabi, the size of the type depends on the range of values included in the enum. Certianly, when Arm Ltd were proposing EABI, EABI had the latter behaviour, and I think there were cases where Linux used "enum" in its UAPI. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!