public inbox for binutils@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "John David Anglin" <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca>
To: ross.alexander@uk.neceur.com
Cc: bje@redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com,
	binutils@lists.thewrittenword.com, law@porcupine.slc.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Patch to config.guess (2002-07-03) to detect 64bit HPUX compiler
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 08:58:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200208211558.g7LFw05C002675@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OFF1BAA8AD.1A891EB1-ON80256C1C.0039A956@uk.neceur.com> from "ross.alexander@uk.neceur.com" at Aug 21, 2002 01:08:19 pm

> There is currently a philosophical problem with hppa*64* at the moment.
> At the moment, HPUX has three possible versions for PA2.0 capable
> systems, that is hppa2.0, hppa2.0n and hppa2.0w.  Now hppa2.0 == hppa2.0n
> but hppa2.0w indicates the OS can *execute* 64bit code.  This has nothing
> to do with the current build environment.  Now the 2.0N vs 2.0W comes from
> both the .level in PA assembly and more importantly the architecture flags
> in cc (ie CC +DA2.0N vs CC +DA2.0W).  However, to go back and stay hppa2.0w
> == 64 build

More precisely, they descibe the PA architecture and data model of the OS.
The hppa2.0w OS architecture is LP64 and it supports two very distinct ABIs.
The default is ILP32 (this is equivalent to using the +DA1.1 option with
the HP compiler--this option is the default).  The other is the 64-bit
LP64 ABI which is equivalent to the +DA2.0W compiler option.  It is
possible other data models may be supported in the future (ILP32_OFFBIG,
LPBIG_OFFBIG).

When the 64-bit GNU tools were developed a few years ago, a decision was
made to use "hppa64" to select the PA2.0-LP64 tools.  The other alternative
would have been to use "hppa2.0w" plus a configure option like
--with-abi=LP64.  The principal reason for not using the second alternative
is that the two ABIs supported under HP-UX 11 are totally different and
require completely separate tools, libraries, etc.  HP provided wrappers for
their tools but this isn't possible with the GNU tools.  It's also
simpler to just use "hppa64", particularly if config.guess did an ABI
check of the compiler.

> environment rather than hppa2.0w == 64 capable OS may potentially break a
> very large amount of code, and it would have to cleared though the gcc and
> binutils groups.

Yes.  I don't favor changing to the second alternative.  Note that "hppa64"
is accepted by config.sub for selecting the optional ABI.

> How about the following (example)
> 
> cpu_host=`if echo "__LP64__" | $CC -E - | grep -q __LP64__; then echo
> hppa2.0n; else echo hppa2.0w; fi`

Looks reasonable.  Note CCOPTS may affect the result when using the
HP compiler.

Dave
-- 
J. David Anglin                                  dave.anglin@nrc.ca
National Research Council of Canada              (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6605)

  reply	other threads:[~2002-08-21 15:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-08-21  5:09 ross.alexander
2002-08-21  8:58 ` John David Anglin [this message]
2002-08-23  2:40 ross.alexander
2002-08-23 14:29 ` John David Anglin
2002-11-29 22:05   ` Ben Elliston
2002-12-03  7:50     ` John David Anglin
     [not found] <no.id>
2002-12-03  8:31 ` John David Anglin
2002-12-03 16:51   ` John David Anglin
2002-12-04  1:53     ` Ben Elliston

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=200208211558.g7LFw05C002675@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca \
    --to=dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca \
    --cc=binutils@lists.thewrittenword.com \
    --cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=bje@redhat.com \
    --cc=law@porcupine.slc.redhat.com \
    --cc=ross.alexander@uk.neceur.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).