* X32 psABI status update
@ 2011-03-05 19:08 H.J. Lu
2011-03-06 17:29 ` H.J. Lu
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-05 19:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Development, GNU C Library, LKML, x32-abi
Hi,
Many x32 bugs are fixed in kernel, glibc, binutils and GCC:
https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
The major remaining issues are glibc/gcc testsuite failures,
kernel core dump and signal handler unwind.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-05 19:08 X32 psABI status update H.J. Lu
@ 2011-03-06 17:29 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-07 21:33 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-16 4:19 ` H.J. Lu
2 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-06 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Development, GNU C Library, LKML, x32-abi
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 11:08 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Many x32 bugs are fixed in kernel, glibc, binutils and GCC:
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>
> The major remaining issues are glibc/gcc testsuite failures,
> kernel core dump and signal handler unwind.
>
I checked in a kernel patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/hjl/linux-2.6.37.y.git;a=commitdiff;h=7fd04de9dca8871772d97928c338d4a2eb315c2b
and a GCC patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-03/msg00267.html
to fix signal handler unwind.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-05 19:08 X32 psABI status update H.J. Lu
2011-03-06 17:29 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2011-03-07 21:33 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-16 4:17 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-16 4:19 ` H.J. Lu
2 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2011-03-07 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: libc-alpha; +Cc: H.J. Lu, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 476 bytes --]
On Saturday, March 05, 2011 14:08:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
> Many x32 bugs are fixed in kernel, glibc, binutils and GCC:
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>
> The major remaining issues are glibc/gcc testsuite failures,
> kernel core dump and signal handler unwind.
are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you extending x86_64-
linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to check for the output
of the compiler+compiler flags ?
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-07 21:33 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-16 4:17 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-16 4:30 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-16 4:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Frysinger; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 05, 2011 14:08:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> Many x32 bugs are fixed in kernel, glibc, binutils and GCC:
>>
>> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>>
>> The major remaining issues are glibc/gcc testsuite failures,
>> kernel core dump and signal handler unwind.
>
> are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you extending x86_64-
> linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to check for the output
> of the compiler+compiler flags ?
x32 requires x32 enabled x86-64 kernel.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* X32 psABI status update
2011-03-05 19:08 X32 psABI status update H.J. Lu
2011-03-06 17:29 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-07 21:33 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-16 4:19 ` H.J. Lu
2 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-16 4:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Development, GNU C Library, LKML, x32-abi
Hi,
Almost all x32 bugs in kernel, glibc and binutils are fixed:
https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
There are no unexpected failures in glibc testsuite. I am
working on remaining GCC bugs.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-16 4:17 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2011-03-16 4:30 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-16 4:51 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2011-03-16 4:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 750 bytes --]
On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 00:17:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 05, 2011 14:08:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> Many x32 bugs are fixed in kernel, glibc, binutils and GCC:
> >>
> >> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
> >>
> >> The major remaining issues are glibc/gcc testsuite failures,
> >> kernel core dump and signal handler unwind.
> >
> > are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you extending
> > x86_64- linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to check
> > for the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
>
> x32 requires x32 enabled x86-64 kernel.
ok, but that doesnt answer my question. what are you passing to --target ?
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-16 4:30 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-16 4:51 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-16 5:24 ` Mike Frysinger
[not found] ` <201103160124.42939.vapier__14164.6524928094$1300277836$gmane$org@gentoo.org>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-16 4:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Frysinger; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 00:17:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > On Saturday, March 05, 2011 14:08:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> Many x32 bugs are fixed in kernel, glibc, binutils and GCC:
>> >>
>> >> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>> >>
>> >> The major remaining issues are glibc/gcc testsuite failures,
>> >> kernel core dump and signal handler unwind.
>> >
>> > are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you extending
>> > x86_64- linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to check
>> > for the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
>>
>> x32 requires x32 enabled x86-64 kernel.
>
> ok, but that doesnt answer my question. what are you passing to --target ?
See:
https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
You configure it as
CC="gcc -mx32" ...../configure x86_64- linux-gnu
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-16 4:51 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2011-03-16 5:24 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-16 12:40 ` H.J. Lu
[not found] ` <201103160124.42939.vapier__14164.6524928094$1300277836$gmane$org@gentoo.org>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2011-03-16 5:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1849 bytes --]
On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 00:51:37 H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 00:17:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> > On Saturday, March 05, 2011 14:08:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> >> Many x32 bugs are fixed in kernel, glibc, binutils and GCC:
> >> >>
> >> >> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
> >> >>
> >> >> The major remaining issues are glibc/gcc testsuite failures,
> >> >> kernel core dump and signal handler unwind.
> >> >
> >> > are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you extending
> >> > x86_64- linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to check
> >> > for the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
> >>
> >> x32 requires x32 enabled x86-64 kernel.
> >
> > ok, but that doesnt answer my question. what are you passing to --target
> > ?
>
> See:
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>
> You configure it as
>
> CC="gcc -mx32" ...../configure x86_64- linux-gnu
that isnt what the page says. it does say for glibc to do:
CC="x32-gcc -mx32 " CXX="x32-g++ -mx32 " CFLAGS="-O2 -g" ../configure
but it doesnt say what to do for binutils or gcc itself. obviously you cant
use the -mx32 flag when building the cross gcc for the first time since the
current native gcc wont support it.
the invocation given for glibc implies that the proposed tuple is x32-linux-
gnu, but the GNU config project doesnt support that tuple and i didnt see
mention of it in the binutils or gcc sources.
so we get back to my original e-mail:
are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you extending
x86_64-linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to check for
the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
[not found] ` <201103160124.42939.vapier__14164.6524928094$1300277836$gmane$org@gentoo.org>
@ 2011-03-16 12:40 ` Andreas Schwab
0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Schwab @ 2011-03-16 12:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Frysinger; +Cc: H.J. Lu, libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> writes:
> but it doesnt say what to do for binutils or gcc itself. obviously you cant
> use the -mx32 flag when building the cross gcc for the first time since the
> current native gcc wont support it.
Of course, for a compiler tool the only thing that matters is the
target.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"And now for something completely different."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-16 5:24 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-16 12:40 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-17 2:57 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-16 12:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Frysinger; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 00:51:37 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 00:17:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> >> > On Saturday, March 05, 2011 14:08:04 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> >> Many x32 bugs are fixed in kernel, glibc, binutils and GCC:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The major remaining issues are glibc/gcc testsuite failures,
>> >> >> kernel core dump and signal handler unwind.
>> >> >
>> >> > are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you extending
>> >> > x86_64- linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to check
>> >> > for the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
>> >>
>> >> x32 requires x32 enabled x86-64 kernel.
>> >
>> > ok, but that doesnt answer my question. what are you passing to --target
>> > ?
>>
>> See:
>>
>> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>>
>> You configure it as
>>
>> CC="gcc -mx32" ...../configure x86_64- linux-gnu
>
> that isnt what the page says. it does say for glibc to do:
> CC="x32-gcc -mx32 " CXX="x32-g++ -mx32 " CFLAGS="-O2 -g" ../configure
>
> but it doesnt say what to do for binutils or gcc itself. obviously you cant
> use the -mx32 flag when building the cross gcc for the first time since the
> current native gcc wont support it.
>
> the invocation given for glibc implies that the proposed tuple is x32-linux-
> gnu, but the GNU config project doesnt support that tuple and i didnt see
> mention of it in the binutils or gcc sources.
>
> so we get back to my original e-mail:
> are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you extending
> x86_64-linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to check for
> the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
As I said, the target is x86_64- linux-gnu and you just add -mx32 to CFLAGS.
The x86_64- linux-gnu binutils and GCC support x32.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-16 12:40 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2011-03-17 2:57 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-17 5:21 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2011-03-17 2:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1217 bytes --]
On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 08:39:57 H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > so we get back to my original e-mail:
> > are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you
> > extending x86_64-linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to
> > check for the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
>
> As I said, the target is x86_64- linux-gnu and you just add -mx32 to
> CFLAGS. The x86_64- linux-gnu binutils and GCC support x32.
ok, took long enough, but that answers most things. your usage of "x32-"
prefixed binaries in the documentation seems to imply a lot more than the fact
you just picked those locally to avoid system collisions. this isnt a wiki
page, otherwise i'd clean things up for you.
in looking at the gcc files, it doesnt seem like there's any defines setup to
declare x32 directly. instead, you'd have to do something like:
#ifdef __x86_64__
# if __SIZEOF_LONG__ == 8
/* x86_64 */
# else
/* x32 */
# endif
#endif
any plans on adding an __x32__ (or whatever) cpp symbol to keep people from
coming up with their own special/broken crap ? or are there some already that
i'm not seeing ?
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-17 2:57 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-17 5:21 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-17 5:45 ` Mike Frysinger
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-17 5:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Frysinger; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 08:39:57 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > so we get back to my original e-mail:
>> > are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you
>> > extending x86_64-linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to
>> > check for the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
>>
>> As I said, the target is x86_64- linux-gnu and you just add -mx32 to
>> CFLAGS. The x86_64- linux-gnu binutils and GCC support x32.
>
> ok, took long enough, but that answers most things. your usage of "x32-"
> prefixed binaries in the documentation seems to imply a lot more than the fact
> you just picked those locally to avoid system collisions. this isnt a wiki
> page, otherwise i'd clean things up for you.
Any suggestion how to create a wiki page for x32?
> in looking at the gcc files, it doesnt seem like there's any defines setup to
> declare x32 directly. instead, you'd have to do something like:
> #ifdef __x86_64__
> # if __SIZEOF_LONG__ == 8
> /* x86_64 */
> # else
> /* x32 */
> # endif
> #endif
>
> any plans on adding an __x32__ (or whatever) cpp symbol to keep people from
> coming up with their own special/broken crap ? or are there some already that
> i'm not seeing ?
The idea is in most cases, you only need to check __x86_64__ since x32 and
x86-64 are very close. In some cases, x32 is very different from x86_64, like
assembly codes on long and pointer, you can check __x86_64__ and __LP64__.
In glibc, I used a different approach by using macros REG_RAX, .., MOV_LP,
ADD_LP, SUB_LP and CMP_LP in assembly codes.
I added a simple howto for x32 compiling to
https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
Thanks.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-17 5:21 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2011-03-17 5:45 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-17 14:43 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-17 17:38 ` Richard Henderson
2011-03-21 5:09 ` Mike Frysinger
2 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2011-03-17 5:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1861 bytes --]
On Thursday, March 17, 2011 01:21:16 H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > ok, took long enough, but that answers most things. your usage of "x32-"
> > prefixed binaries in the documentation seems to imply a lot more than the
> > fact you just picked those locally to avoid system collisions. this
> > isnt a wiki page, otherwise i'd clean things up for you.
>
> Any suggestion how to create a wiki page for x32?
seems like the sites.google.com documentation says it includes wiki support.
http://sites.google.com/site/projectwikitemplate_en/
ive never used google sites before, so i dont know how to actually enable it
on the admin side of things.
> > in looking at the gcc files, it doesnt seem like there's any defines
> > setup to declare x32 directly. instead, you'd have to do something
> > like: #ifdef __x86_64__
> > # if __SIZEOF_LONG__ == 8
> > /* x86_64 */
> > # else
> > /* x32 */
> > # endif
> > #endif
> >
> > any plans on adding an __x32__ (or whatever) cpp symbol to keep people
> > from coming up with their own special/broken crap ? or are there some
> > already that i'm not seeing ?
>
> The idea is in most cases, you only need to check __x86_64__ since x32 and
> x86-64 are very close. In some cases, x32 is very different from x86_64,
> like assembly codes on long and pointer, you can check __x86_64__ and
> __LP64__. In glibc, I used a different approach by using macros REG_RAX,
> .., MOV_LP, ADD_LP, SUB_LP and CMP_LP in assembly codes.
arm/mips/ppc sets up explicit ABI defines to clearly differentiate between
things. while __LP64__ should work here, it seems like a poor substitute.
how about builtin_define("__X32__") ? or __ABI_X32__ ? doesnt seem like i386
has a standard in this regard to piggy off of.
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-17 5:45 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-17 14:43 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-17 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Frysinger; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2011 01:21:16 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > ok, took long enough, but that answers most things. your usage of "x32-"
>> > prefixed binaries in the documentation seems to imply a lot more than the
>> > fact you just picked those locally to avoid system collisions. this
>> > isnt a wiki page, otherwise i'd clean things up for you.
>>
>> Any suggestion how to create a wiki page for x32?
>
> seems like the sites.google.com documentation says it includes wiki support.
> http://sites.google.com/site/projectwikitemplate_en/
>
> ive never used google sites before, so i dont know how to actually enable it
> on the admin side of things.
I will take a look.
>> > in looking at the gcc files, it doesnt seem like there's any defines
>> > setup to declare x32 directly. instead, you'd have to do something
>> > like: #ifdef __x86_64__
>> > # if __SIZEOF_LONG__ == 8
>> > /* x86_64 */
>> > # else
>> > /* x32 */
>> > # endif
>> > #endif
>> >
>> > any plans on adding an __x32__ (or whatever) cpp symbol to keep people
>> > from coming up with their own special/broken crap ? or are there some
>> > already that i'm not seeing ?
>>
>> The idea is in most cases, you only need to check __x86_64__ since x32 and
>> x86-64 are very close. In some cases, x32 is very different from x86_64,
>> like assembly codes on long and pointer, you can check __x86_64__ and
>> __LP64__. In glibc, I used a different approach by using macros REG_RAX,
>> .., MOV_LP, ADD_LP, SUB_LP and CMP_LP in assembly codes.
>
> arm/mips/ppc sets up explicit ABI defines to clearly differentiate between
> things. while __LP64__ should work here, it seems like a poor substitute.
> how about builtin_define("__X32__") ? or __ABI_X32__ ? doesnt seem like i386
> has a standard in this regard to piggy off of.
If you can show me some real examples how __x32__ will be used, I will
take a look.
Thanks.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-17 5:21 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-17 5:45 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-17 17:38 ` Richard Henderson
2011-03-21 5:09 ` Mike Frysinger
2 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: Richard Henderson @ 2011-03-17 17:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: Mike Frysinger, libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On 03/16/2011 10:21 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, March 16, 2011 08:39:57 H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>> so we get back to my original e-mail:
>>>> are you getting a unique host tuple for this ? or are you
>>>> extending x86_64-linux-gnu ? so the only way of knowing which ABI is to
>>>> check for the output of the compiler+compiler flags ?
>>>
>>> As I said, the target is x86_64- linux-gnu and you just add -mx32 to
>>> CFLAGS. The x86_64- linux-gnu binutils and GCC support x32.
>>
>> ok, took long enough, but that answers most things. your usage of "x32-"
>> prefixed binaries in the documentation seems to imply a lot more than the fact
>> you just picked those locally to avoid system collisions. this isnt a wiki
>> page, otherwise i'd clean things up for you.
>
> Any suggestion how to create a wiki page for x32?
Hanging it off of gcc.gnu.org/wiki wouldn't be a bad idea, imo.
r~
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-17 5:21 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-17 5:45 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-17 17:38 ` Richard Henderson
@ 2011-03-21 5:09 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-21 5:35 ` H.J. Lu
2 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2011-03-21 5:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1574 bytes --]
On Thursday, March 17, 2011 01:21:16 H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > in looking at the gcc files, it doesnt seem like there's any defines
> > setup to declare x32 directly. instead, you'd have to do something
> > like: #ifdef __x86_64__
> > # if __SIZEOF_LONG__ == 8
> > /* x86_64 */
> > # else
> > /* x32 */
> > # endif
> > #endif
> >
> > any plans on adding an __x32__ (or whatever) cpp symbol to keep people
> > from coming up with their own special/broken crap ? or are there some
> > already that i'm not seeing ?
>
> The idea is in most cases, you only need to check __x86_64__ since x32 and
> x86-64 are very close. In some cases, x32 is very different from x86_64,
> like assembly codes on long and pointer, you can check __x86_64__ and
> __LP64__. In glibc, I used a different approach by using macros REG_RAX,
> .., MOV_LP, ADD_LP, SUB_LP and CMP_LP in assembly codes.
while i agree with you in general that this is how people should be doing
things, in practice i often see people fishing around. education only goes so
far, so if there was an __x32__ define, i feel like people are more likely to
get it right than wrong.
i dont have any use cases off the top of my head, but i wouldnt be surprised
if the heavy inline assembly people (like the multimedia peeps e.g. libav)
approached it this way. rather than google for documentation, look at the cpp
output between -m64 and -mx32 and see what sticks out. "__x32__" would
certainly do that.
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-21 5:09 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-21 5:35 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-21 5:53 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-21 5:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Frysinger; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2011 01:21:16 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > in looking at the gcc files, it doesnt seem like there's any defines
>> > setup to declare x32 directly. instead, you'd have to do something
>> > like: #ifdef __x86_64__
>> > # if __SIZEOF_LONG__ == 8
>> > /* x86_64 */
>> > # else
>> > /* x32 */
>> > # endif
>> > #endif
>> >
>> > any plans on adding an __x32__ (or whatever) cpp symbol to keep people
>> > from coming up with their own special/broken crap ? or are there some
>> > already that i'm not seeing ?
>>
>> The idea is in most cases, you only need to check __x86_64__ since x32 and
>> x86-64 are very close. In some cases, x32 is very different from x86_64,
>> like assembly codes on long and pointer, you can check __x86_64__ and
>> __LP64__. In glibc, I used a different approach by using macros REG_RAX,
>> .., MOV_LP, ADD_LP, SUB_LP and CMP_LP in assembly codes.
>
> while i agree with you in general that this is how people should be doing
> things, in practice i often see people fishing around. education only goes so
> far, so if there was an __x32__ define, i feel like people are more likely to
> get it right than wrong.
>
> i dont have any use cases off the top of my head, but i wouldnt be surprised
> if the heavy inline assembly people (like the multimedia peeps e.g. libav)
> approached it this way. rather than google for documentation, look at the cpp
> output between -m64 and -mx32 and see what sticks out. "__x32__" would
> certainly do that.
My point is __x86_64__ version should work for both 64bit and x32. There should
no need for a separate x32 version.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-21 5:35 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2011-03-21 5:53 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-21 6:55 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2011-03-21 5:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2271 bytes --]
On Monday, March 21, 2011 01:35:35 H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 17, 2011 01:21:16 H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> > in looking at the gcc files, it doesnt seem like there's any defines
> >> > setup to declare x32 directly. instead, you'd have to do something
> >> > like: #ifdef __x86_64__
> >> > # if __SIZEOF_LONG__ == 8
> >> > /* x86_64 */
> >> > # else
> >> > /* x32 */
> >> > # endif
> >> > #endif
> >> >
> >> > any plans on adding an __x32__ (or whatever) cpp symbol to keep people
> >> > from coming up with their own special/broken crap ? or are there some
> >> > already that i'm not seeing ?
> >>
> >> The idea is in most cases, you only need to check __x86_64__ since x32
> >> and x86-64 are very close. In some cases, x32 is very different from
> >> x86_64, like assembly codes on long and pointer, you can check
> >> __x86_64__ and __LP64__. In glibc, I used a different approach by using
> >> macros REG_RAX, .., MOV_LP, ADD_LP, SUB_LP and CMP_LP in assembly
> >> codes.
> >
> > while i agree with you in general that this is how people should be doing
> > things, in practice i often see people fishing around. education only
> > goes so far, so if there was an __x32__ define, i feel like people are
> > more likely to get it right than wrong.
> >
> > i dont have any use cases off the top of my head, but i wouldnt be
> > surprised if the heavy inline assembly people (like the multimedia peeps
> > e.g. libav) approached it this way. rather than google for
> > documentation, look at the cpp output between -m64 and -mx32 and see
> > what sticks out. "__x32__" would certainly do that.
>
> My point is __x86_64__ version should work for both 64bit and x32. There
> should no need for a separate x32 version.
yes, and my point is that people often reach for cpp defines rather than
figure out how to do it right.
i'm not saying that __x32__ should be defined in place of __x86_64__, just
that when -mx32 is used, __x32__ is additionally defined. simply as an
example, what i'm referring to could be accomplished by adding this to the
*cpp specs:
%{mx32:-D__x32__=1}
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-21 5:53 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2011-03-21 6:55 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-21 8:20 ` Michael Matz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-21 6:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Frysinger; +Cc: libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Monday, March 21, 2011 01:35:35 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > On Thursday, March 17, 2011 01:21:16 H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:57 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> >> > in looking at the gcc files, it doesnt seem like there's any defines
>> >> > setup to declare x32 directly. instead, you'd have to do something
>> >> > like: #ifdef __x86_64__
>> >> > # if __SIZEOF_LONG__ == 8
>> >> > /* x86_64 */
>> >> > # else
>> >> > /* x32 */
>> >> > # endif
>> >> > #endif
>> >> >
>> >> > any plans on adding an __x32__ (or whatever) cpp symbol to keep people
>> >> > from coming up with their own special/broken crap ? or are there some
>> >> > already that i'm not seeing ?
>> >>
>> >> The idea is in most cases, you only need to check __x86_64__ since x32
>> >> and x86-64 are very close. In some cases, x32 is very different from
>> >> x86_64, like assembly codes on long and pointer, you can check
>> >> __x86_64__ and __LP64__. In glibc, I used a different approach by using
>> >> macros REG_RAX, .., MOV_LP, ADD_LP, SUB_LP and CMP_LP in assembly
>> >> codes.
>> >
>> > while i agree with you in general that this is how people should be doing
>> > things, in practice i often see people fishing around. education only
>> > goes so far, so if there was an __x32__ define, i feel like people are
>> > more likely to get it right than wrong.
>> >
>> > i dont have any use cases off the top of my head, but i wouldnt be
>> > surprised if the heavy inline assembly people (like the multimedia peeps
>> > e.g. libav) approached it this way. rather than google for
>> > documentation, look at the cpp output between -m64 and -mx32 and see
>> > what sticks out. "__x32__" would certainly do that.
>>
>> My point is __x86_64__ version should work for both 64bit and x32. There
>> should no need for a separate x32 version.
>
> yes, and my point is that people often reach for cpp defines rather than
> figure out how to do it right.
>
> i'm not saying that __x32__ should be defined in place of __x86_64__, just
> that when -mx32 is used, __x32__ is additionally defined. simply as an
> example, what i'm referring to could be accomplished by adding this to the
> *cpp specs:
> %{mx32:-D__x32__=1}
I don't think it will help x32 and I think it will make it harder to
add x32 support.
I still want to see a real usage before I add it.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-21 6:55 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2011-03-21 8:20 ` Michael Matz
2011-03-21 10:52 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: Michael Matz @ 2011-03-21 8:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: Mike Frysinger, libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
Hi,
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
> I don't think it will help x32 and I think it will make it harder to add
> x32 support. I still want to see a real usage before I add it.
% cat real-world.c
/* intptr_t; what's that? */
union space_saving_htab_element {
void *generic_pointer;
/* Usually we need a long for a pointer, but I just figured out
that on x32 an int is enough and smaller. My program
now needs half as much memory, supi! */
#ifdef __x32__
unsigned int as_number;
#else
unsigned long as_number;
#endif
};
Ciao,
Michael.
PS: Of course you and I wouldn't write such code, but Mikes point was that
there might be some that do. I could probably construct an example where
it would matter for real involving inline asm that for some reason has to
slightly differ depending on x32-ness.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: X32 psABI status update
2011-03-21 8:20 ` Michael Matz
@ 2011-03-21 10:52 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-03-21 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Matz; +Cc: Mike Frysinger, libc-alpha, GCC Development, LKML, x32-abi
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Michael Matz <matz@suse.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, H.J. Lu wrote:
>
>> I don't think it will help x32 and I think it will make it harder to add
>> x32 support. I still want to see a real usage before I add it.
>
> % cat real-world.c
> /* intptr_t; what's that? */
> union space_saving_htab_element {
> void *generic_pointer;
> /* Usually we need a long for a pointer, but I just figured out
> that on x32 an int is enough and smaller. My program
> now needs half as much memory, supi! */
> #ifdef __x32__
> unsigned int as_number;
> #else
> unsigned long as_number;
> #endif
> };
That is the wrong way to support x32. You should remove "#ifdef __x32__",
which only shows __x32__ shouldn't be used/needed.
>
> Ciao,
> Michael.
> PS: Of course you and I wouldn't write such code, but Mikes point was that
> there might be some that do. I could probably construct an example where
> it would matter for real involving inline asm that for some reason has to
> slightly differ depending on x32-ness.
>
I am still waiting for a real example.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: x32 psABI status update
[not found] ` <AANLkTikkpK9ouXckHaVzwXe+p_Cz2hVH5T7xOoQL7OSE@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2011-02-19 22:52 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-02-19 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xinliang David Li; +Cc: x32-abi, GNU C Library, GCC Development, Binutils
More data
* 186.crafty from SPEC CPU 2000 (64bit integer):
o Intel Core i7
+ ~5% slower than x86-64.
+ ~29% faster than ia32.
+ Sizes in bytes:
text data bss dec
hex filename
200519 16388 1068916 1285823
139ebf crafty.32
172389 16868 1069784 1259041
133621 crafty.64
174723 16564 1068916 1260203
133aab crafty.x32
o Intel Atom
+ ~6% slower than x86-64.
+ ~7% faster than ia32.
+ Sizes in bytes:
text data bss dec
hex filename
199339 16388 1068916 1284643 139a23 crafty.32
171157 16868 1069784 1257809 133151 crafty.64
173535 16564 1068916 1259015 133607
crafty.x32
H.J.
---
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl@google.com> wrote:
> This shows how important ilp32 is for some applications. It would be good to
> show the impact of larger register set. Candidates are those spec programs
> which are slower with ia32.
>
> David
>
> On Feb 19, 2011 10:14 AM, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:28 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:45 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:22 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Initial kernel, glibc and gcc port for x32 psABI draft version 0.2 is
>>>> done:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Kernel should be very stable. Fedora 14 kernel patch is also
>>>> available.
>>>> 2. Need to fix GCC run-time libraries.
>>>> 3. Need to fix glibc tests.
>>>>
>>>> Please check them out and provide feed backs.
>>>
>>> I updated x32 website:
>>>
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>>>
>>> with "get started" instructions.
>>>
>>
>> I update the x32 website
>>
>> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>>
>> with data on mcf in SPEC CPU 2K:
>>
>> * 181.mcf from SPEC CPU 2000:
>> o Intel Core i7
>> + ~32% faster than x86-64.
>> + ~1% slower than ia32.
>> + Sizes in bytes:
>>
>> text data bss dec
>> hex filename
>> 12155 336 7036 19527
>> 4c47 mcf.32
>> 12421 664 13568 26653
>> 681d mcf.64
>> 11583 412 7040 19035
>> 4a5b mcf.x32
>>
>> o Intel Atom
>> + ~28% faster than x86-64.
>> + ~0.5% slower than ia32.
>> + Sizes in bytes:
>>
>> text data bss dec
>> hex filename
>> 12059 336 7036 19431
>> 4be7 mcf.32
>> 12341 664 13568 26573
>> 67cd mcf.64
>> 11411 412 7040 18863
>> 49af mcf.x32
>>
>>
>> --
>> H.J.
>
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: x32 psABI status update
2011-02-19 20:57 ` H.J. Lu
@ 2011-02-19 22:01 ` H.J. Lu
[not found] ` <AANLkTikkpK9ouXckHaVzwXe+p_Cz2hVH5T7xOoQL7OSE@mail.gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-02-19 22:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Development, Binutils, GNU C Library, x32-abi
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:28 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:45 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:22 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> 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
>>>
>>
>> Initial kernel, glibc and gcc port for x32 psABI draft version 0.2 is done:
>>
>> 1. Kernel should be very stable. Fedora 14 kernel patch is also available.
>> 2. Need to fix GCC run-time libraries.
>> 3. Need to fix glibc tests.
>>
>> Please check them out and provide feed backs.
>
> I updated x32 website:
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
>
> with "get started" instructions.
>
I update the x32 website
https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
with data on mcf in SPEC CPU 2K:
* 181.mcf from SPEC CPU 2000:
o Intel Core i7
+ ~32% faster than x86-64.
+ ~1% slower than ia32.
+ Sizes in bytes:
text data bss dec
hex filename
12155 336 7036 19527
4c47 mcf.32
12421 664 13568 26653
681d mcf.64
11583 412 7040 19035
4a5b mcf.x32
o Intel Atom
+ ~28% faster than x86-64.
+ ~0.5% slower than ia32.
+ Sizes in bytes:
text data bss dec
hex filename
12059 336 7036 19431
4be7 mcf.32
12341 664 13568 26573
67cd mcf.64
11411 412 7040 18863
49af mcf.x32
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* Re: x32 psABI status update
2011-02-17 11:04 x32 " H.J. Lu
@ 2011-02-19 20:57 ` H.J. Lu
2011-02-19 22:01 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-02-19 20:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Development, Binutils, GNU C Library, x32-abi
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:45 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:22 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> 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
>>
>
> Initial kernel, glibc and gcc port for x32 psABI draft version 0.2 is done:
>
> 1. Kernel should be very stable. Fedora 14 kernel patch is also available.
> 2. Need to fix GCC run-time libraries.
> 3. Need to fix glibc tests.
>
> Please check them out and provide feed backs.
I updated x32 website:
https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/
with "get started" instructions.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
* x32 psABI status update
@ 2011-02-17 11:04 H.J. Lu
2011-02-19 20:57 ` H.J. Lu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 25+ messages in thread
From: H.J. Lu @ 2011-02-17 11:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Development, Binutils, GNU C Library, x32-abi
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:22 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> 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
>
Initial kernel, glibc and gcc port for x32 psABI draft version 0.2 is done:
1. Kernel should be very stable. Fedora 14 kernel patch is also available.
2. Need to fix GCC run-time libraries.
3. Need to fix glibc tests.
Please check them out and provide feed backs.
Thanks.
--
H.J.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 25+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-21 10:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-05 19:08 X32 psABI status update H.J. Lu
2011-03-06 17:29 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-07 21:33 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-16 4:17 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-16 4:30 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-16 4:51 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-16 5:24 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-16 12:40 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-17 2:57 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-17 5:21 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-17 5:45 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-17 14:43 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-17 17:38 ` Richard Henderson
2011-03-21 5:09 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-21 5:35 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-21 5:53 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-03-21 6:55 ` H.J. Lu
2011-03-21 8:20 ` Michael Matz
2011-03-21 10:52 ` H.J. Lu
[not found] ` <201103160124.42939.vapier__14164.6524928094$1300277836$gmane$org@gentoo.org>
2011-03-16 12:40 ` Andreas Schwab
2011-03-16 4:19 ` H.J. Lu
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-02-17 11:04 x32 " H.J. Lu
2011-02-19 20:57 ` H.J. Lu
2011-02-19 22:01 ` H.J. Lu
[not found] ` <AANLkTikkpK9ouXckHaVzwXe+p_Cz2hVH5T7xOoQL7OSE@mail.gmail.com>
2011-02-19 22:52 ` H.J. Lu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).