From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail8.parnet.fi (mail8.parnet.fi [77.234.108.134]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E7DA3858D1E for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 12:53:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail9.parnet.fi (mail9.parnet.fi [77.234.108.21]) by mail8.parnet.fi with ESMTP id 303CrQxJ028584-303CrQxK028584; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 14:53:27 +0200 Received: from foo.martin.st (host-97-187.parnet.fi [77.234.97.187]) by mail9.parnet.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28038A1471; Tue, 3 Jan 2023 14:53:25 +0200 (EET) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 14:53:24 +0200 (EET) From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Martin_Storsj=F6?= To: NightStrike cc: Mark Harmstone , wej22007@outlook.com, zac.walker@linaro.org, tamar.christina@arm.com, binutils Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] ld: Rename aarch64pe emulation target to arm64pe In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <513db747-c89c-85f3-dc29-13ab8cfcceba@martin.st> References: <20221230024055.31841-1-mark@harmstone.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-FE-Policy-ID: 3:14:2:SYSTEM X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, 3 Jan 2023, NightStrike via Binutils wrote: > On Thu, Dec 29, 2022, 21:41 Mark Harmstone wrote: > >> * The aarch64pe emulation target is renamed to arm64pe. This is the name >> that LLVM is already using, even though as a rule we call this arch >> aarch64. >> Without this clang won't work with ld. Another possibility would be to >> change the -m parameter if it's "arm64", but that seems to me like it's >> making things more complicated than they need to be. >> > > Or just fix clang. Seems like if clang wants to work with ld, clang should > use ld's name. When lld added the "arm64pe" target in the mingw mode of lld, 5 years ago, there was no support for such a target in binutils ld. That support is being added now. Therefore - there was no reference for what to name this particular target in the ld.bfd like interface mode - so I picked one name which seemed to make sense for it - "arm64pe". Now when binutils is catching up 5 years later, I think it's courteous to go along with the name that was picked within lld for this mode. // Martin