From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nsz@port70.net>
Received: from port70.net (port70.net [81.7.13.123])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C5DC385B835
 for <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 09:58:02 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 3C5DC385B835
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=port70.net
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nsz@port70.net
Received: by port70.net (Postfix, from userid 1002)
 id 79BA6ABEC0BA; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 11:58:00 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 11:58:00 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>
To: Nicholas Piggin via Libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>, libc-dev@lists.llvm.org,
 linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [musl] Powerpc Linux 'scv' system call ABI proposal take 2
Message-ID: <20200416095800.GC23945@port70.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Nicholas Piggin via Libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>, 
 Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>, libc-dev@lists.llvm.org,
 linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, musl@lists.openwall.com
References: <1586931450.ub4c8cq8dj.astroid@bobo.none>
 <20200415225539.GL11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <1586994952.nnxigedbu2.astroid@bobo.none>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1586994952.nnxigedbu2.astroid@bobo.none>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
 KAM_NUMSUBJECT, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS,
 SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://sourceware.org/mailman/options/libc-alpha>,
 <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/libc-alpha>,
 <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 09:58:04 -0000

* Nicholas Piggin via Libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org> [2020-04-16 10:16:54 +1000]:
> Well it would have to test HWCAP and patch in or branch to two 
> completely different sequences including register save/restores yes.
> You could have the same asm and matching clobbers to put the sequence
> inline and then you could patch the one sc/scv instruction I suppose.

how would that 'patch' work?

there are many reasons why you don't
want libc to write its .text