From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87CA23858D1E for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 14:08:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE212F4; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 06:09:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.2.78.76] (unknown [10.2.78.76]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 371223F587; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 06:08:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <01e2b3d2-ad18-27ba-9761-82d2d521c00e@foss.arm.com> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 14:08:38 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] ld: Rename aarch64pe emulation target to arm64pe To: Tamar Christina , NightStrike , Mark Harmstone Cc: "wej22007@outlook.com" , "zac.walker@linaro.org" , binutils , "nickc@redhat.com" References: <20221230024055.31841-1-mark@harmstone.com> Content-Language: en-GB From: Richard Earnshaw In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3491.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 03/01/2023 12:09, Tamar Christina via Binutils wrote: > Unfortunately I don’t think it’s that simple.. > > Sadly the name Arm64 is the one Microsoft has chosen to call their target ABI. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/overview Further this is extended to Arm64EC etc https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/build/arm64-windows-abi-conventions?view=msvc-170. > > So even though this is not the official naming that Arm uses, it’s however the official one on Windows and so it’s > reasonable that the PE target in LD follow this. > > So this is reasonable so long as the actual target itself stays aarch64-little. > > Kind Regards, > Tamar > > From: NightStrike > Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 12:00 PM > To: Mark Harmstone > Cc: wej22007@outlook.com; zac.walker@linaro.org; Tamar Christina ; binutils > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] ld: Rename aarch64pe emulation target to arm64pe > > > On Thu, Dec 29, 2022, 21:41 Mark Harmstone > wrote: > * The aarch64pe emulation target is renamed to arm64pe. This is the name > that LLVM is already using, even though as a rule we call this arch aarch64. > Without this clang won't work with ld. Another possibility would be to > change the -m parameter if it's "arm64", but that seems to me like it's > making things more complicated than they need to be. > > Or just fix clang. Seems like if clang wants to work with ld, clang should use ld's name. The problem with arm64 is that it also matches existing configure scripts that use arm* for the 32-bit targets. I don't think this is a good idea. GNU tools have consistently used the official name for all targets. R.