This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFC: A new MIPS64 ABI


On Feb 14, 2011, at 6:50 PM, David Daney wrote:

> On 02/14/2011 06:33 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
>> 
>> On Feb 14, 2011, at 6:22 PM, David Daney wrote:
>> 
>>> On 02/14/2011 04:15 PM, Matt Thomas wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I have to wonder if it's worth the effort.  The primary problem I see
>>>> is that this new ABI requires a 64bit kernel since faults through the
>>>> upper 2G will go through the XTLB miss exception vector.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes, that is correct.  It is a 64-bit ABI, and like the existing n32 ABI requires a 64-bit kernel.
>> 
>> N32 doesn't require a LP64 kernel, just a 64-bit register aware kernel.
>> Your N32-big does require a LP64 kernel.
>> 
> 
> But using 'official' kernel sources the only way to get a 64-bit register aware kernel is for it to also be LP64.  So effectively, you do in fact need a 64-bit kernel to run n32 userspace code.

Not all the world is Linux. :)  NetBSD supports N32 kernels.  

> My proposed ABI would need trivial kernel changes:
> 
> o Fix a couple of places where pointers are sign extended instead of zero extended.

I think you'll find there are more of these than you'd expect.

> o Change the stack address and address ranges returned by mmap().

My biggest concern is that many many mips opcodes expect properly 
sign-extended value for registers.  Thusly N32-big will require 
using daddu/dadd/dsub/dsubu for addresses.  So that's yet another
departure from N32 which can use addu/add/sub/subu.

> The main work would be in the compiler toolchain and runtime libraries.

You'd also need to update gas for la and dla expansion.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]