From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A0C3840C17; Tue, 2 Jun 2020 01:37:16 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 48A0C3840C17 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=segher@kernel.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 0521ajvN013264; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 20:36:45 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 0521ahNW013257; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 20:36:43 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 20:36:43 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Daniel Kolesa Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com, Will Springer , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, eery@paperfox.es, Palmer Dabbelt via binutils , libc-dev@lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [musl] Re: ppc64le and 32-bit LE userland compatibility Message-ID: <20200602013643.GL31009@gate.crashing.org> References: <2047231.C4sosBPzcN@sheen> <20200530192212.GG31009@gate.crashing.org> <2956705.fEcJ0Lxnt5@sheen> <20200531204205.GI31009@gate.crashing.org> <4205b197-b964-451e-bc41-59b35d1dd233@www.fastmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4205b197-b964-451e-bc41-59b35d1dd233@www.fastmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, TXREP, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR, T_SPF_PERMERROR autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2020 01:37:17 -0000 On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 12:29:56AM +0200, Daniel Kolesa wrote: > On Sun, May 31, 2020, at 22:42, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > > There was just an assumption that LE == powerpc64le in libgo, spotted by > > > q66 (daniel@ on the CC). I just pushed the patch to [1]. > > > > Please send GCC patches to gcc-patches@ ? > > FWIW, that patch alone is not very useful, we'd need to otherwise patch libgo to recognize a new GOARCH (as right now it's likely to just use 'ppc' which is wrong). Gotcha. > That said, we'll get back to you with any patches we have. One I can already think of - we will need to update the dynamic linker name so that it uses ld-musl-powerpcle.so instead of powerpc (musl needs to be updated the same way by adding the subarch variable for the 'le' prefix). Thanks! That would be good progress. > > > > Almost no project that used 32-bit PowerPC in LE mode has sent patches > > > > to the upstreams. > > > > > > Right, but I have heard concerns from at least one person familiar with > > > the ppc kernel about breaking existing users of this arch-endianness > > > combo, if any. It seems likely that none of those use upstream, though ^^; > > > > So we don't care, because we *cannot* care. > > Well, that's the reason this thread was opened in the first place - to call out to any potential users, and synchronize with upstreams on a single way forward that all upstreams can agree on, since this effort requires changes in various parts of the stack. We don't want to hog changes locally or otherwise do any changes that would be in conflict with upstream projects, as that would mean needlessly diverging, which only means trouble later on. Much appreciated! I don't actually foresee any huge problems -- just lots of hard work ;-) Segher