This will begin the process of breaking up the `useLLVM` monolith. That
is good in general, but I hope will be good for NetBSD and Darwin in
particular.
Co-authored-by: sterni <sternenseemann@systemli.org>
Stating that CPUs and the isCompatible relation forms a category (or
preorder) is correct but overtly technical. We can state it more
clearly for readers unfamiliar with mathematics while retaining some
keywords to be useful to technical readers.
This PR adds a new aarch64 android toolchain, which leverages the
existing crossSystem infrastructure and LLVM builders to generate a
working toolchain with minimal prebuilt components.
The only thing that is prebuilt is the bionic libc. This is because it
is practically impossible to compile bionic outside of an AOSP tree. I
tried and failed, braver souls may prevail. For now I just grab the
relevant binaries from https://android.googlesource.com/.
I also grab the msm kernel sources from there to generate headers. I've
included a minor patch to the existing kernel-headers derivation in
order to expose an internal function.
Everything else, from binutils up, is using stock code. Many thanks to
@Ericson2314 for his help on this, and for building such a powerful
system in the first place!
One motivation for this is to be able to build a toolchain which will
work on an aarch64 linux machine. To my knowledge, there is no existing
toolchain for an aarch64-linux builder and an aarch64-android target.
These are all the architectures supported by Nixpkgs on other
platforms, that are also supported by NetBSD. (So I haven't added
any architectures that are new to Nixpkgs here, even though NetBSD
supports some that we don't have.)
The previous mess was partially grouped by OS, and partially grouped
by architecture, which made it very difficult to know where to add new
entries.
I've chosen to group by OS entirely, because OSes are likely to
maintain exhaustive lists of supported architectures, but it's far
less likely we'd be able to find exhaustive lists of supported OSes
for every architecture.
Forcing the module to be builtin breaks 5.10, which wants to compile it as a
module (probably due to dependencies). There doesn't seem to be a need to have
it builtin anymore, so we can just remove the override.
In 9c213398b3 kernelPreferBuiltin was
moved/renamed to linux-kernel.preferBuiltin. However, for
armv7l-hf-multiplatform the new option was written with an uppercase P,
which made the kernel build process ignore it.
PPC64 supports two ABIs: ELF v1 and v2.
ELFv1 is historically what GCC and most packages expect, but this is
changing because musl outright does not work with ELFv1. So any distro
which uses musl must use ELFv2. Many other platforms are moving to ELFv2
too, such as FreeBSD (as of v13) and Gentoo (as of late 2020).
Since we use musl extensively, let's default to ELFv2.
Nix gives us the power to specify this declaratively for the entire
system, so ELFv1 is not dropped entirely. It can be specified explicitly
in the target config, e.g. "powerpc64-unknown-linux-elfv1". Otherwise the
default is "powerpc64-unknown-linux-elfv2". For musl,
"powerpc64-unknown-linux-musl" must use elfv2 internally to function.
Looks like these got left behind in the
kernelArch -> linuxArch migration.
Fixes:
* pkgsCross.powernv.linuxHeaders
* pkgsCross.riscv64.linuxHeaders
* pkgsCross.riscv32.linuxHeaders
and dependees
The `platform` field is pointless nesting: it's just stuff that happens
to be defined together, and that should be an implementation detail.
This instead makes `linux-kernel` and `gcc` top level fields in platform
configs. They join `rustc` there [all are optional], which was put there
and not in `platform` in anticipation of a change like this.
`linux-kernel.arch` in particular also becomes `linuxArch`, to match the
other `*Arch`es.
The next step after is this to combine the *specific* machines from
`lib.systems.platforms` with `lib.systems.examples`, keeping just the
"multiplatform" ones for defaulting.
Since 40e7be1 all ARM platforms that didn't have a parsed cpu version
(e.g. arm-none-eabi) would be handled as armv7l-hf-multiplatform which
did break building arm-trusted-platform packages for some targets (e.g.
rk3399).
Using pcBase as fallback, instead of armv7l-hf-multiplatform,
corresponds with the behaviour we had before 40e7be1.
The last use of `kernelMajor` in Nixpkgs was removed in 2018.
Even then, I'm not positive it was actually in an exercised code path.
AFAIUI this is now totally redundant and useless as it really was meant
for the 2.4 -> 2.6 transition.
newlib is the default for most tools when no kernel is provided. Other
exist, but this seems like a safe default.
(cherry picked from commit 8009c20711)
This reverts commit ce2f74df2c.
Doubles are treated as -darwin here, to provide some consistency.
There is some ambiguity between “x86_64-darwin” and “i686-darwin”
which could refer to binaries linked between iOS simulator or real
macOS binaries. useiOSPrebuilt can be used to determine which to use,
however.
This makes things a little bit more convenient. Just pass in like:
$ nix-build ’<nixpkgs>’ -A hello --argstr localSystem x86_64-linux --argstr crossSystem aarch64-linux
Adds pkgsCross.wasm32 and pkgsCross.wasm64. Use it to build Nixpkgs
with a WebAssembly toolchain.
stdenv/cross: use static overlay on isWasm
isWasm doesn’t make sense dynamically linked.
It is useful to make these dynamic and not bake them into gcc. This
means we don’t have to rebuild gcc to change these values. Instead, we
will pass cflags to gcc based on platform values. This was already
done hackily for android gcc (which is multi-target), but not for our
own gccs which are single target.
To accomplish this, we need to add a few things:
- add ‘arch’ to cpu
- add NIX_CFLAGS_COMPILE_BEFORE flag (goes before args)
- set -march everywhere
- set mcpu, mfpu, mmode, and mtune based on targetPlatform.gcc flags
cc-wrapper: only set -march when it is in the cpu type
Some architectures don’t have a good mapping of -march. For instance
POWER architecture doesn’t support the -march flag at all!
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/RS_002f6000-and-PowerPC-Options.html#RS_002f6000-and-PowerPC-Options
This makes us less reliant on the systems/examples.nix. You should be
able to cross compile with just your triple:
$ nix build --arg crossSystem '{ config = "armv6l-unknown-linux-gnueabi"; }' stdenv
ppc64le and ppc64 are different targets in the configure script. We
can’t use the same one.
TODO: canonicalize similar ones based on qemu’s configure script.
New android ndk (18) now uses clang. We were going through the wrapper
that are provided. This lead to surprising errors when building.
Ideally we could use the llvm linker as well, but this leads to errors
as many packages don’t support the llvm linker.
Comments on conflicts:
- llvm: d6f401e1 vs. 469ecc70 - docs for 6 and 7 say the default is
to build all targets, so we should be fine
- some pypi hashes: they were equivalent, just base16 vs. base32
* add generic x86_32 support
- Add support for i386-i586.
- Add `isx86_32` predicate that can replace most uses of `isi686`.
- `isi686` is reinterpreted to mean "exactly i686 arch, and not say i585 or i386".
- This branch was used to build working i586 kernel running on i586 hardware.
* revert `isi[345]86`, remove dead code
- Remove changes to dead code in `doubles.nix` and `for-meta.nix`.
- Remove `isi[345]86` predicates since other cpu families don't have specific model predicates.
* remove i386-linux since linux not supported on that cpu
eabihf is an abi that can be used with ARM architectures that support
the “hard float”. It should probably only be used with ARM32 when you
are absolutely sure your binaries will run on ARM systems with a FPU.
Also, add an example "armhf-embedded" to match the preexisting
arm-embedded system. qmk_firmware needs hard float in a few places, so
add them here to get that to work.
Fixes#51184
You can use stdenv.hostPlatform.emulator to get an executable that
runs cross-built binaries. This could be any emulator. For instance,
we use QEMU to emulate Linux targets and Wine to emulate Windows
targets. To work with qemu, we need to support custom targets.
I’ve reworked the cross tests in pkgs/test/cross to use this
functionality.
Also, I’ve used talloc to cross-execute with the emulator. There
appears to be a cross-execute for all waf builds. In the future, it
would be nice to set this for all waf builds.
Adds stdenv.hostPlatform.qemuArch attrbute to get the qemuArch for
each platform.
- respect libc’s incdir and libdir
- make non-unix systems single threaded
- set LIMITS_H_TEST to false for avr
- misc updates to support new libc’s
- use multilib with avr
For threads we want to use:
- posix on unix systems
- win32 on windows
- single on everything else
For avr:
- add library directories for avrlibc
- to disable relro and bind
- avr5 should have precedence over avr3 - otherwise gcc uses the wrong one
This has been not touched in 6 years. Let's remove it to cause less
problems when adding new cross-compiling infrastructure.
This also simplify gcc significantly.
binutils expects x86_64-unknown-netbsd<version> (only 3 parts!). Any other combo seems to fail.
Also handle darwin versions similarly.
/cc @Ericson2314
It wasn’t exactly clear which NDK you were using previously. This adds
an attribute to system that handles what version of the NDK we should
use when building things.
/cc @Ericson2314
In particular, now the mainline kernel can be built on the RPi 1 as well
(so kernelBaseConfig should always be a mainline defconfig from now on).
And RPi 2 users can now use linux_rpi without doing the
`nixpkgs.config.platform = lib.systems.platforms.raspberrypi2;` dance.
There are two different official variations which differ in their float
support, so such a blanket statement is invalid.
`lib.systems.platforms.*android` already handles each case correctly.
Correcting an error in 827ef09140.
ARM ABIs now have a float field. This is used as a fallback to lessen
our use of `platform.gcc.float`. I didn't know what the MIPs convention
is so I kept using `platform.gcc.float` in that case.
The commented-out configs are @shlevy's old known-good ones. I changed
them as needed to play nice with lib.systems.parse but did not test so
leaving them as comments for now.
Following legacy packing conventions, `isArm` was defined just for
32-bit ARM instruction set. This is confusing to non packagers though,
because Aarch64 is an ARM instruction set.
The official ARM overview for ARMv8[1] is surprisingly not confusing,
given the overall state of affairs for ARM naming conventions, and
offers us a solution. It divides the nomenclature into three levels:
```
ISA: ARMv8 {-A, -R, -M}
/ \
Mode: Aarch32 Aarch64
| / \
Encoding: A64 A32 T32
```
At the top is the overall v8 instruction set archicture. Second are the
two modes, defined by bitwidth but differing in other semantics too, and
buttom are the encodings, (hopefully?) isomorphic if they encode the
same mode.
The 32 bit encodings are mostly backwards compatible with previous
non-Thumb and Thumb encodings, and if so we can pun the mode names to
instead mean "sets of compatable or isomorphic encodings", and then
voilà we have nice names for 32-bit and 64-bit arm instruction sets
which do not use the word ARM so as to not confused either laymen or
experienced ARM packages.
[1]: https://developer.arm.com/products/architecture/a-profile
(cherry picked from commit ba52ae5048)
Following legacy packing conventions, `isArm` was defined just for
32-bit ARM instruction set. This is confusing to non packagers though,
because Aarch64 is an ARM instruction set.
The official ARM overview for ARMv8[1] is surprisingly not confusing,
given the overall state of affairs for ARM naming conventions, and
offers us a solution. It divides the nomenclature into three levels:
```
ISA: ARMv8 {-A, -R, -M}
/ \
Mode: Aarch32 Aarch64
| / \
Encoding: A64 A32 T32
```
At the top is the overall v8 instruction set archicture. Second are the
two modes, defined by bitwidth but differing in other semantics too, and
buttom are the encodings, (hopefully?) isomorphic if they encode the
same mode.
The 32 bit encodings are mostly backwards compatible with previous
non-Thumb and Thumb encodings, and if so we can pun the mode names to
instead mean "sets of compatable or isomorphic encodings", and then
voilà we have nice names for 32-bit and 64-bit arm instruction sets
which do not use the word ARM so as to not confused either laymen or
experienced ARM packages.
[1]: https://developer.arm.com/products/architecture/a-profile
- `localSystem` is added, it strictly supercedes system
- `crossSystem`'s description mentions `localSystem` (and vice versa).
- No more weird special casing I don't even understand
TEMP
The isSeccomputable flag treated Linux without seccomp as just a
normal variant, when it really should be treated as a special case
incurring complexity debt to support.
The isKexecable flag treated Linux without kexec as just a normal
variant, when it really should be treated as a special case incurring
complexity debt to support.
Otherwise obscure cross-compilations are hampered. `all` breaks all but
the initial derivation (which we can't even write yet) in an open world
setting however, so we really shouldn't have it.
I noticed LLVM accepts `ios` as its own OS in platform triples; a
recent change as far as I know. I see it also accepts `macos*` for macOS
(formerly OS X). If it's now customary to distinguish iOS like so
(rather than guessing from the aarch, lets add both so our OSes are
still disjoint, and make Darwin a family instead.
But changing the config everywhere would probably be a mass rebuild, and
I'm not sure how well other software supports OSes besides "darwin", so
I'm keeping that the default name for macOS for now.
First, we need check against the host platform, not the build platform.
That's simple enough.
Second, we move away from exahustive finite case analysis (i.e.
exhaustively listing all platforms the package builds on). That only
work in a closed-world setting, where we know all platforms we might
build one. But with cross compilation, we may be building for arbitrary
platforms, So we need fancier filters. This is the closed world to open
world change.
The solution is instead of having a list of systems (strings in the form
"foo-bar"), we have a list of of systems or "patterns", i.e. attributes
that partially match the output of the parsers in `lib.systems.parse`.
The "check meta" logic treats the systems strings as an exact whitelist
just as before, but treats the patterns as a fuzzy whitelist,
intersecting the actual `hostPlatform` with the pattern and then
checking for equality. (This is done using `matchAttrs`).
The default convenience lists for `meta.platforms` are now changed to be
lists of patterns (usually a single pattern) in
`lib/systems/for-meta.nix` for maximum flexibility under this new
system.
Fixes#30902
Negative reasoning like `allBut` is a bad idea with an open world of
platforms. Concretely, if we add a new, quite different sort of
platform, existing packages with `allBut` will claim they work on it
even though they probably won't.
Existing "mips64el" should be "mipsel".
This is just the barest minimum so that nixpkgs can recognize them as
systems - although required for building individual derivations onto
MIPS boards, it is not sufficient if you want to actually build nixos on
those targets
Note this doesn't actually provide musl support yet,
just improves our "system" code to understand
musl-based triples and non-glibc linux configurations.
I need some module system types here so I can next fix meta-checks for
derivations. I'd like to use a "proper" record type here, but submodule
types seem overkill so holding off with ad-hoc stuff for now. In
practice, all I need for the next step are the `.check` functions so
this is good, especially as the submodule check function is shallow,
saving full inductive type-checking for a later step.
