This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC: Add 32bit x86-64 support to binutils
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sourceware dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 13:35:51 -0800
- Subject: Re: RFC: Add 32bit x86-64 support to binutils
- References: <20101230182308.GA21296@intel.com> <AANLkTi=AKj9XfcAJ_LZViRwTm--ydmqVR1XQeSDdZUrN@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 December 2010 18:23, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> This patch adds 32bit x86-64 support to binutils. Support in compiler,
>> library and OS is required to use it. ?It can be used to implement the
>> new 32bit OS for x86-64. ?Any comments?
>
> I have a small comment on the changes to the c-i386.texi docs:
>
> diff --git a/gas/doc/c-i386.texi b/gas/doc/c-i386.texi
> index 1c6175b..c3956a8 100644
> --- a/gas/doc/c-i386.texi
> +++ b/gas/doc/c-i386.texi
> @@ -56,11 +56,14 @@ dependent options:
> ?@table @gcctabopt
> ?@cindex @samp{--32} option, i386
> ?@cindex @samp{--32} option, x86-64
> +@cindex @samp{--n32} option, i386
> +@cindex @samp{--n32} option, x86-64
> ?@cindex @samp{--64} option, i386
> ?@cindex @samp{--64} option, x86-64
> -@item --32 | --64
> +@item --32 | --n32 | --64
> ?Select the word size, either 32 bits or 64 bits. Selecting 32-bit
> ?implies Intel i386 architecture, while 64-bit implies AMD x86-64
> +architecture. ?@samp{--n32} selects 32bit word size with AMD x86-64
> ?architecture.
>
> Simply adding the new sentence at the end is not very clear, because
> the last sentence contradicts the second sentence: ?--n32 selects
> 32-bit word size, but does not imply Intel i386 architecture.
>
> Also, "32bit" and "32-bit" should be used consistently.
>
> How about:
>
> ?Select the word size, either 32 bits or 64 bits. @samp{--32}
> ?implies Intel i386 architecture, while @samp{--n32} and @samp{--64}
> ?imply AMD x86-64 architecture with 32-bit or 64-bit word-size
> ?respectively.
>
Thanks. I checked it in.
--
H.J.
---
Index: ChangeLog
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gas/ChangeLog,v
retrieving revision 1.4376
diff -u -p -r1.4376 ChangeLog
--- ChangeLog 5 Jan 2011 00:16:49 -0000 1.4376
+++ ChangeLog 5 Jan 2011 21:34:34 -0000
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2011-01-05 Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
+
+ * doc/c-i386.texi: Clarify --n32.
+
2011-01-04 H.J. Lu <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
* config/tc-i386.c (build_modrm_byte): Allow encoding 32/64bit
Index: doc/c-i386.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gas/doc/c-i386.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.53
diff -u -p -r1.53 c-i386.texi
--- doc/c-i386.texi 31 Dec 2010 00:33:34 -0000 1.53
+++ doc/c-i386.texi 5 Jan 2011 21:34:34 -0000
@@ -61,10 +61,10 @@ dependent options:
@cindex @samp{--64} option, i386
@cindex @samp{--64} option, x86-64
@item --32 | --n32 | --64
-Select the word size, either 32 bits or 64 bits. Selecting 32-bit
-implies Intel i386 architecture, while 64-bit implies AMD x86-64
-architecture. @samp{--n32} selects 32bit word size with AMD x86-64
-architecture.
+Select the word size, either 32 bits or 64 bits. @samp{--32}
+implies Intel i386 architecture, while @samp{--n32} and @samp{--64}
+imply AMD x86-64 architecture with 32-bit or 64-bit word-size
+respectively.
These options are only available with the ELF object file format, and
require that the necessary BFD support has been included (on a 32-bit