From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20861 invoked by alias); 16 Feb 2011 20:46:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 20812 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Feb 2011 20:46:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-qy0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-qy0-f169.google.com) (209.85.216.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 20:46:06 +0000 Received: by qyk7 with SMTP id 7so3748781qyk.0 for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:46:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.74.13 with SMTP id s13mr1402022qaj.149.1297889164117; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:46:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.61.18 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 12:46:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4D5C2DD2.10608@zytor.com> <4D5C34F8.9060506@tilera.com> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 20:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: x32 psABI draft version 0.2 From: "H.J. Lu" To: Andrew Pinski Cc: Chris Metcalf , "H. Peter Anvin" , x32-abi@googlegroups.com, GCC Development , Binutils , GNU C Library Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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/msg00198.txt.bz2 On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Chris Metcalf wro= te: >> For what it's worth, the Tilera 64-bit architecture (forthcoming) includ= es >> support for a 32-bit compatibility layer that is similar to x32. =A0It u= ses >> 64-bit registers throughout (e.g. for double and long long), but 32-bit >> addresses. =A0The addresses between 2GB and 4GB are not directly usable = as >> 64-bit addresses since we sign-extend all 32-bit values to make the ISA >> more straightforward. =A0We use the "compat" layer to provide our syscall >> table, since we don't have a traditional compatibility layer in this mode >> (unlike x86_64 and i386). > > This sounds more like MIPS' n32 than x32 really. > Yes, x32 can access the full 4GB address space. There are some additional optimizations which can be done in x32, but not in x86-64 small model. --=20 H.J.