This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa at zytor dot com>
- To: x32-abi at googlegroups dot com
- Cc: Mark Butler <butlerm at middle dot net>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, discuss at x86-64 dot org, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, GDB <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 14:05:35 -0700
- Subject: Re: [x86-64 psABI] RFC: Extend x86-64 psABI to support x32
- References: <CAMe9rOqE84CeCEZHxahccP2obgb50zdJWuY0z3UzWnDYn=g_4A@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAMe9rOqhnmcUhjO8SH6Ggz-VmyGFyuDrMHJU27HjKV+UM1RASA@mail.gmail.com> <4FEA131D.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 06/28/2012 02:03 PM, Mark Butler wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 1:53:01 PM UTC-6, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
It's worth noting that there are *no* Linux platforms that are not
or LP64, so adding a third memory model is likely to cause even more
Care to comment on what sort of things would be likely to cause a large
number of problems porting to an L64P32 model? I understand that L32P64
(as in Windows 64 bit) causes lots of problems, because there is a lot
of code that assumes that a pointer can be converted to a long and back.
That would not be a problem with L64P32 however, because there
pointers would be smaller than longs rather than larger.
Every time you introduce a new model you will have problems, but in
Linux it is a strong assumption that sizeof(long) == sizeof(void *).
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.