From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11467 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2011 15:22:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 11447 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2011 15:22:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,TW_IB,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ksp.mff.cuni.cz (HELO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz) (195.113.26.206) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:22:36 +0000 Received: by atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 4018) id 28FADF0BF6; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 16:22:34 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:22:00 -0000 From: Jan Hubicka To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: Jan Beulich , "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: <20110217152233.GB11346@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <4D5C2DD2.10608@zytor.com> <4D5CEBDE02000078000325A2@vpn.id2.novell.com> <20110217142916.GI13037@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110217142916.GI13037@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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/msg00212.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. According to Mozilla folks however REL+RELA scheme used by EABI leads to significandly smaller libxul.so size According to http://glandium.org/blog/?p=1177 the difference is about 4-5MB (out of approximately 20-30MB shared lib) Honza > > Jakub