From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4736 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2011 14:29:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 4652 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2011 14:29:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,TW_IB,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz (HELO sunsite.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.15.26) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:29:33 +0000 Received: from sunsite.mff.cuni.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sunsite.mff.cuni.cz (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p1HETHD8008142; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:29:17 +0100 Received: (from jj@localhost) by sunsite.mff.cuni.cz (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p1HETHMx008140; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:29:17 +0100 Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 14:29:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Jan Beulich Cc: "H.J. Lu" , "H. Peter Anvin" , GCC Development , x32-abi@googlegroups.com, Binutils , GNU C Library Subject: Re: x32 psABI draft version 0.2 Message-ID: <20110217142916.GI13037@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <4D5C2DD2.10608@zytor.com> <4D5CEBDE02000078000325A2@vpn.id2.novell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D5CEBDE02000078000325A2@vpn.id2.novell.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-02/txt/msg00211.txt.bz2 On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 08:35:26AM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 16.02.11 at 21:04, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: > > On 02/16/2011 11:22 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I updated x32 psABI draft to version 0.2 to change x32 library path > >> from lib32 to libx32 since lib32 is used for ia32 libraries on Debian, > >> Ubuntu and other derivative distributions. The new x32 psABI is > >> available from: > >> > >> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/home > >> > > > > I'm wondering if we should define a section header flag (sh_flags) > > and/or an ELF header flag (e_flags) for x32 for the people unhappy about > > keying it to the ELF class... > > Thanks for supporting this! > > Besides that I also wonder why all the 64-bit relocations get > marked as LP64-only. It is clear that some of them can be useful > in ILP32 as well, and there's no reason to preclude future uses > even if currently no-one can imagine any. > > Furthermore, it seems questionable to continue to require rela > relocations when for all normal ones (leaving aside the 8- and 16- > bit ones) the addend can fit in the relocated field. REL is horrible pain, we shouldn't ever add new REL targets. Jakub