From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9D2D3858405 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:30 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org A9D2D3858405 Received: from pps.filterd (m0187473.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 19SGpj41018155 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:29 GMT Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3byyrq0pym-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:29 +0000 Received: from m0187473.ppops.net (m0187473.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 19SH1krL007132 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:29 GMT Received: from ppma01dal.us.ibm.com (83.d6.3fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.63.214.131]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3byyrq0py2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:29 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 19SH7hJx015717; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:27 GMT Received: from b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.15]) by ppma01dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3bx4fbbty0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:27 +0000 Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.237]) by b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 19SHRQS122282888 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:26 GMT Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3489DC6069; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCCE2C6061; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from linux.ibm.com (unknown [9.163.50.62]) by b03ledav006.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:25 +0000 (GMT) From: Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho To: Fangrui Song Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Improve lld support and current status In-Reply-To: <20211027233731.2nphydkpzrxr7v35@google.com> References: <20211026200346.3371750-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20211026203327.6b2o5k4cmkuzzm6j@google.com> <87lf2ejdnw.fsf@linux.ibm.com> <20211027233731.2nphydkpzrxr7v35@google.com> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.32.1 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/27.2 (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 14:27:24 -0300 Message-ID: <87ee85jc03.fsf@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 9Me_DxQFQsUaaozfZ6Sz3VS7Vh6Ackgs X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: zQ5xUzq1j8j2woLjB9i97NtHLJp9hiyx X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.182.1,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.0.607.475 definitions=2021-10-28_04,2021-10-26_01,2020-04-07_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=988 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2110280090 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) 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: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 17:27:32 -0000 Fangrui Song via Libc-alpha writes: > You are right:) The incomplete PowerPC64 ELF v1 support was removed by > https://reviews.llvm.org/D46316 (2018-05). Is there remaining ELF v1 > usage for powerpc64le in glibc? No. We reuse code whenever possible, but that's all. However, without this support we can't build glibc for powerpc64 big-endian (aka. powerpc64-linux). -- Tulio Magno