From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 90423 invoked by alias); 14 Aug 2019 05:51:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 90416 invoked by uid 89); 14 Aug 2019 05:51:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_FAIL,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=problemshtml, problems.html, docshtml, UD:docs.html X-HELO: gateway21.websitewelcome.com Received: from gateway21.websitewelcome.com (HELO gateway21.websitewelcome.com) (192.185.46.113) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 05:51:06 +0000 Received: from cm13.websitewelcome.com (cm13.websitewelcome.com [100.42.49.6]) by gateway21.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B64E400C647F for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 00:51:05 -0500 (CDT) Received: from gator4009.hostgator.com ([192.185.4.20]) by cmsmtp with SMTP id xmBdh0lJ63Qi0xmBdhieVk; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 00:51:05 -0500 Received: from 0190101441.0.fullrate.ninja ([2.110.93.203]:50986 helo=[192.168.1.49]) by gator4009.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hxmBc-002dLO-Pl for cygwin@cygwin.com; Wed, 14 Aug 2019 00:51:04 -0500 Subject: Re: Inefficient use of 64-bit addresses in Clang To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <732305300.268416262.1565603129541.JavaMail.root@zimbra54-e10.priv.proxad.net> From: Agner Fog Message-ID: <024ce5b5-6024-b371-e382-5eef5d1d4a90@agner.org> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 05:51:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <732305300.268416262.1565603129541.JavaMail.root@zimbra54-e10.priv.proxad.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-08/txt/msg00171.txt.bz2 It's a difference in memory model. clang 6.0.0 under ubuntu with --target=x86_64-pc-cygwin gives relative addresses, unless you specify -mcmodel=large. Cygwin clang with -mcmodel=small does the right thing: use relative addresses. The -mcmodel=small option appears to work differently for Linux and for Windows targets. I cannot find any documentation of this difference. See: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42983 On 12/08/2019 11.45, falk.tannhauser@free.fr wrote: > References: <578eb489-9391-9009-82ad-676eeb4c1c92@agner.org> > In-Reply-To: <578eb489-9391-9009-82ad-676eeb4c1c92@agner.org> > > Could the different behaviour between Cygwin and Linux simply be due to different Clang versions? > The current version under Cygwin is 5.0.1, while the latest version available under Linux > appears to be 8.0.1 . > > Falk > > -- > Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html > FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ > Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html > Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple > > -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple