Re: RFC: Program Properties

[Suprateeka R Hegde <hegdesmailbox@gmail.com>]

On 12-Oct-2016 11:33 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> 1. Minimum ISAs.  Executables and shared objects, which are optimized
> specifically to run on a particular processor, will not run on processors
> which don't support the same set of ISAs.  Since x86 only has EM_IAMCU,
> EM_386 and EM_X86_64 ELF machine codes, run-time loader needs additional
> information to tell if an executable or a shared object is compatible
> with available ISAs.

Why cant the following be defined as processor specific e_flags (like 
other processors do) in elf.h itself?

Instead of GNU_PROPERT_X86_*, why cant we have EF_X86_* (and adjust the 
mechanism/logic of the proposal accordingly) ? That would make it 
uniform at least as per elf.h.

X86, as a processor architecture, need not be tied to GNU?


> Integer value for the x86 instruction set support.
>
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_486           (1U << 0)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_586           (1U << 1)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_686           (1U << 2)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_SSE           (1U << 3)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_SSE2          (1U << 4)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_SSE3          (1U << 5)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_SSSE3         (1U << 6)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_SSE4_1        (1U << 7)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_SSE4_2        (1U << 8)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX           (1U << 9)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX2          (1U << 10)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX512F       (1U << 11)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX512CD      (1U << 12)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX512ER      (1U << 13)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX512PF      (1U << 14)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX512VL      (1U << 15)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX512DQ      (1U << 16)
> #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_AVX512BW      (1U << 17)

--
Supra