-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 69
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Tier 3 target proposal: bare-metal loongarch64 #628
Comments
This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed. cc @rust-lang/compiler @rust-lang/compiler-contributors |
Most Rust freestanding/bare-metal targets use just
|
@rustbot second
|
@rustbot label -final-comment-period +major-change-accepted |
…apkin Add new Tier-3 targets: `loongarch64-unknown-none*` This PR adds new Tier-3 targets `loongarch64-unknown-none*` that are introduced by MCP rust-lang/compiler-team#628
Proposal
This compiler MCP proposes new targets, loongarch64-unknown-none{-softfloat}, for bare-metal or "freestanding" loongarch64 binaries with no operating system, using ELF as the object format. This target is intended for firmware, kernels, modules, and other software running without an operating system.
Target Tier Policy Acknowledgements
ISA Docs
👍
There are no known legal issues or license incompatibilities.
👍
The
loongarch64-unknown-none*
target will implementcore
, and will support users usingalloc
with their own memory allocator. Theloongarch64-unknown-none*
target will not support std, and will not provide a default memory allocator.👍
👍
👍
Mentors or Reviewers
r? @wesleywiser
Process
The main points of the Major Change Process are as follows:
@rustbot second
.-C flag
, then full team check-off is required.@rfcbot fcp merge
on either the MCP or the PR.You can read more about Major Change Proposals on forge.
Comments
This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: