From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:49:03 +0100 (BST) Received: from voldemort.codesourcery.com ([IPv6:::ffff:65.73.237.138]:36582 "EHLO mail.codesourcery.com") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 23 Sep 2003 20:49:01 +0100 Received: (qmail 21400 invoked from network); 23 Sep 2003 19:42:03 -0000 Received: from dhcp119.icir.org (HELO taltos.codesourcery.com) (zack@192.150.187.119) by mail.codesourcery.com with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 23 Sep 2003 19:42:03 -0000 Received: by taltos.codesourcery.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:45:36 -0700 From: "Zack Weinberg" To: Eric Christopher Cc: Thiemo Seufer , Alexandre Oliva , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , Atsushi Nemoto , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: recent binutils and mips64-linux References: <1063988420.2537.5.camel@ghostwheel.sfbay.redhat.com> <20030919164119.GH13578@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <20030922233952.GR13578@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <1064280106.21720.0.camel@ghostwheel.sfbay.redhat.com> <20030923081447.GS13578@rembrandt.csv.ica.uni-stuttgart.de> <1064340070.21720.14.camel@ghostwheel.sfbay.redhat.com> <20030923181659.GA30037@nevyn.them.org> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 12:45:36 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20030923181659.GA30037@nevyn.them.org> (Daniel Jacobowitz's message of "Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:16:59 -0400") Message-ID: <87eky7b867.fsf@codesourcery.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 3277 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: zack@codesourcery.com Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips Daniel Jacobowitz writes: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 11:01:11AM -0700, Eric Christopher wrote: >> >> I'm still trying to figure out why you are going through such weird >> contortions at all. I understand not having an elf64 loader. That's what >> the objcopy comment was for, everything else I don't understand. Why not >> compile for the abi you want? > > Compare the optimal way to load an address into a register when you > have a full 64-bit address space and when you know that addresses are > sign extended. I'm told it saves over 100K of code. Maybe what you really want is an -mdata-model=kernel switch (or some such spelling) that tells gcc to do the right thing in the first place? zw