From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8877 invoked by alias); 9 May 2011 17:47:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 8849 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2011 17:47:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail3.caviumnetworks.com (HELO mail3.caviumnetworks.com) (12.108.191.235) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 May 2011 17:47:10 +0000 Received: from caexch01.caveonetworks.com (Not Verified[192.168.16.9]) by mail3.caviumnetworks.com with MailMarshal (v6,7,2,8378) id ; Mon, 09 May 2011 10:48:10 -0700 Received: from caexch01.caveonetworks.com ([192.168.16.9]) by caexch01.caveonetworks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 9 May 2011 10:47:08 -0700 Received: from dd1.caveonetworks.com ([12.108.191.236]) by caexch01.caveonetworks.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 9 May 2011 10:47:08 -0700 Message-ID: <4DC82897.7020206@caviumnetworks.com> Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 17:47:00 -0000 From: David Daney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101027 Fedora/3.0.10-1.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ralf Baechle CC: linux-mips , GCC , binutils , Prasun Kapoor , rdsandiford@googlemail.com Subject: Re: RFC: A new MIPS64 ABI References: <4D5990A4.2050308__41923.1521235362$1297715435$gmane$org@caviumnetworks.com> <87hbbxqihm.fsf@firetop.home> <20110509142828.GA7196@linux-mips.org> In-Reply-To: <20110509142828.GA7196@linux-mips.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2011-05/txt/msg00109.txt.bz2 On 05/09/2011 07:28 AM, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 07:45:41PM +0000, Richard Sandiford wrote: > >> David Daney writes: >>> Background: >>> >>> Current MIPS 32-bit ABIs (both o32 and n32) are restricted to 2GB of >>> user virtual memory space. This is due the way MIPS32 memory space is >>> segmented. Only the range from 0..2^31-1 is available. Pointer >>> values are always sign extended. >>> >>> Because there are not already enough MIPS ABIs, I present the ... >>> >>> Proposal: A new ABI to support 4GB of address space with 32-bit >>> pointers. >> >> FWIW, I'd be happy to see this go into GCC. > > So am I for the kernel primarily because it's not really a new ABI but > an enhancement of the existing N32 ABI. > The patches are resting peacefully on my laptop. Now with endorcements like these, I may be forced to actually finish them... David Daney