From: Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de>
To: binutils@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix distinction of 32/64bit addresses in MIPS gas
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 08:11:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010907171141.C30834@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <wvn3d5zw140.fsf@talisman.cambridge.redhat.com>
Richard Sandiford wrote:
> Thiemo Seufer <ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> writes:
> > How could it do that? The o32 ABI does _not_ specify this flag,
> > a file without any ABI flags set is a valid o32 file. I can't
> > see what the use of the O32 header flag could be.
>
> Ok, that hadn't twigged, sorry!
>
> So, if I've understood you correctly, your take seems to be:
>
> - O32 doesn't define an ABI bit for ELF, so every ELF file without
> an ABI flag set should be compatible with O32.
Not exactly. Most tools will _regard_ it as o32, even if it isn't.
> Whereas mine is:
>
> - O32 doesn't define an ABI bit for ELF, so users dosn't have that
> safety net if they use the wrong options. They need to remember
> to use the appropriate command-line switches, like -mabi=32.
ABI header flags were invented for remembering it. It would be nice
if the linker had a chance to find out what the file actually is.
> Fleshing that out a bit, I think:
>
> GAS has historically supported all sorts of wierd and wonderful
> combinations that don't have any representation in the ELF header
> flags. And for which no ABI flags will be set. I don't think that's
> reason enough not to allow them. GAS should generate whatever code
> the command line tells it to, whether or not those options can be
> determined from the output file.
One NO_ABI_FLAG as a catchall would be enough to let at least the
GNU tools know what the file is _not_.
[snip]
> > AFAICS my patch doesn't break the limited 64bit support.
>
> Like you said in your previous mail, it means that $gp is now assumed to
> be a 32-bit rather than 64-bit value.
This is always assumed for everything loaded in 32bit address space.
> There might be dynamic loaders
> out there that handle the R_MIPS_64 extension, which could replace them
> with genuine 64-bit (as opposed to sign-extended 32-bit) addresses.
They can't, because R_MIPS_64 holds only 32bit in this case.
[snip]
> > Yes, it inflates the number of variants without need.
>
> ...I really don't see why maintaining the old variant is a problem. All
> the main part of your patch did was change the definition of the
> HAVE_32BIT_ADDRESSES macro, it didn't really seem to simplify the code
> as such.
It didn't increase complexity while providing all what I need
for full 64bit support. That's the advantage over a
32BIT -- HALF_64BIT -- FULL_64BIT approach.
[snip]
> I still don't see why you need to do that, sorry! Sometimes these things
> take a while to sink in. In what situation would the two be different?
> Like you say, they should be inverses.
Full 64bit support requires a 64bit object format to work, half
64bit support doesn't have one and has it's code in 32bit space.
This means for e.g. "dli" a expansion to
lui $a, %highest(sym)
lui $b, %hi(sym)
daddiu $a, %higher(sym)
daddiu $b, %lo(sym)
dsll32 $a, 0
daddu $a, $a, $b
for 64bit addresses, while 32bit addresses should use
lui $a, %hi(sym)
addiu $a, %lo(sym)
for performance and code size. The half 64bit version currently
uses
lui $a, %hi(sym)
daddiu $a, %lo(sym)
which does exactly the same but pretends to use 64bit addresses.
I hope it got clearer now.
Thiemo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-09-07 8:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-08-24 18:26 Thiemo Seufer
2001-08-31 8:02 ` Richard Sandiford
2001-08-31 8:28 ` H . J . Lu
2001-08-31 9:17 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-08-31 9:53 ` Geoff Keating
2001-08-31 10:31 ` Thiemo Seufer
[not found] ` <mailpost.999279120.2469@postal.sibyte.com>
2001-08-31 10:37 ` cgd
2001-08-31 11:46 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-08-31 11:49 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2001-08-31 11:50 ` Ian Lance Taylor
[not found] ` <mailpost.999283589.5294@postal.sibyte.com>
2001-08-31 12:41 ` cgd
2001-08-31 14:31 ` H . J . Lu
2001-09-03 23:07 ` cgd
2001-09-06 10:50 ` H . J . Lu
2001-09-06 10:59 ` cgd
2001-09-06 11:07 ` H . J . Lu
2001-09-06 11:35 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-06 11:39 ` cgd
2001-09-06 11:40 ` cgd
2001-09-08 12:03 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-09-08 16:38 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-08 16:56 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-06 11:57 ` Richard Sandiford
2001-09-06 20:53 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-06 21:09 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-06 21:12 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-06 22:38 ` H . J . Lu
2001-09-06 23:11 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-07 4:10 ` Richard Sandiford
2001-09-07 6:22 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-07 7:02 ` Richard Sandiford
2001-09-07 8:11 ` Thiemo Seufer [this message]
2001-09-07 9:20 ` Richard Sandiford
2001-09-07 9:49 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-06 11:14 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-06 11:08 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-08-31 18:22 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-09-03 2:57 ` Richard Sandiford
2001-09-03 15:00 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-08-31 14:49 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-08-31 15:00 ` H . J . Lu
2001-08-31 16:30 ` Eric Christopher
2001-08-31 16:41 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-08-31 16:46 ` H . J . Lu
2001-08-31 17:45 ` matthew green
2001-09-02 19:25 ` J Grant
2001-08-31 16:44 ` H . J . Lu
2001-08-31 17:42 ` matthew green
2001-08-31 19:06 ` H . J . Lu
2001-08-31 19:11 ` matthew green
[not found] ` <mailpost.999310274.17560@postal.sibyte.com>
2001-09-03 23:18 ` cgd
2001-09-06 11:00 ` H . J . Lu
2001-09-06 11:38 ` cgd
2001-09-06 12:09 ` H . J . Lu
2001-08-31 18:49 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-08-31 17:35 ` matthew green
2001-08-31 19:05 ` H . J . Lu
2001-08-31 18:25 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-08-31 20:46 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2001-08-31 21:04 ` Thiemo Seufer
2001-08-31 10:04 ` Richard Sandiford
2001-08-31 10:41 ` Thiemo Seufer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20010907171141.C30834@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de \
--to=ica2_ts@csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de \
--cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).