From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F30DC10DCE for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 01:03:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E34F7206D7 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 01:03:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="GNlwRUAi" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E34F7206D7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48Z5nc16rgzF1Qt for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 12:03:00 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=209.85.214.196; helo=mail-pl1-f196.google.com; envelope-from=npiggin@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=GNlwRUAi; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com (mail-pl1-f196.google.com [209.85.214.196]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48Z5kH66cTzDrT2 for ; Sat, 7 Mar 2020 12:00:07 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id y1so1550613plp.7 for ; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 17:00:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :user-agent:message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SKpsTjwkXtHxFR33ZbtnoX3UyL1my6NqvwiJF3dGxlI=; b=GNlwRUAi8VFX1VoJ7692FRMKsAbDD1wsY/fzjSD0M7LjFV89k1pFTzp7uz9cWFbFon 4X9KvRQnDVRZ9DaDU2KLBXSW1XgsWTKp1a7q3cBwJukY724OQbeG7uk/QNWuQnMv4SLl EKaXHyzxqHrKlcKO8wPcAAjCTHwNLLnEpxHwaas3w2tnmOFoj+7mgpTiUUgtt3SLO4mF lbz0lyroHsWNemyMwWvx1x1ZiZiuMQqE0y5c6xy3wvzHUtmuj29W3XoG6zYf8fngcZhz +CZydXupJz2z16aKmxXcqyrL4CY43uW/WmIT7eOrSS39GioWY0YRptRqSOJQEJP5Sn4Z HM2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:user-agent:message-id:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SKpsTjwkXtHxFR33ZbtnoX3UyL1my6NqvwiJF3dGxlI=; b=AH7HfPQWZw2P3JXHlRLpr2WgIjML52Uq7HkHfmFPj++uH3C+7AETtFqv5RX4Uc/GOY PWb0CK/59Lf6qmveBivGOhnwlMl2NvN8E+ydnsQksor0u9BrtbDW0JUCYUpvUNHcL03q B+JoKMbIkaR5GZ9KY7wENcBrZ1DzXvkHe09h6nfLEu17ek5jxNboxLZ3XSLl8ofCpRV5 ylyZnKU2lP9pT3Y8izeW7XF+WcUy3C12YFl/HF/BxL2rUuhMKsrjTr+IbEp1bftm3/g3 +n2NYWhqnd4Jstp0DltPBEkPdvQLTPbB/P100JyTf6yKyVoUCbaWqb+ipaBVMsdxPwK4 1TJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0amTyfmJSWhgz+eFF30WiprAaTFgsXP0fj3DbcLqUEJ16CdgSV 01yYuKoV6CTh7fXrnhd14r8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuamSllmbtF+oKOGVuQWRQd7oG0YECV7vRQRHxtYdyNtqP5ovm4/NfGO+FqhWY4vsQ4jHt/2A== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:d103:: with SMTP id l3mr6389502pju.116.1583542741151; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 16:59:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (193-116-204-226.tpgi.com.au. [193.116.204.226]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c7sm29483001pfp.98.2020.03.06.16.58.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 06 Mar 2020 16:59:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2020 10:58:54 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/64: BE option to use ELFv2 ABI for big endian kernels To: Segher Boessenkool References: <20200303014527.39377-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <20200303230950.GM22482@gate.crashing.org> <1583379060.p6od1jalr3.astroid@bobo.none> <20200305105503.GZ22482@gate.crashing.org> In-Reply-To: <20200305105503.GZ22482@gate.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: astroid/0.15.0 (https://github.com/astroidmail/astroid) Message-Id: <1583542596.l37hgse8mc.astroid@bobo.none> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Segher Boessenkool's on March 5, 2020 8:55 pm: > On Thu, Mar 05, 2020 at 01:34:22PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: >> Segher Boessenkool's on March 4, 2020 9:09 am: >> >> +override flavour :=3D linux-ppc64v2 >> >=20 >> > That isn't a good name, heh. This isn't "v2" of anything... Spell ou= t >> > the name "ELFv2"? Or as "elfv2"? It is just a name after all, it is >> > version 1 in all three version fields in the ELF headers! >>=20 >> Yeah okay. This part is only for some weird little perl asm generator >> script, but probably better to be careful. linux-ppc64-elfv2 ? >=20 > That generator is from openssl, or inspired by it, it is everywhere. > So it is more important to get it right than it would seem at first > glance ;-) >=20 > That name looks perfect to me. You'll have to update REs expecting the > arch at the end (like /le$/), but you had to already I think? le$ is still okay for testing ppc64le, unless you wanted me to add the=20 -elfv2 suffix on there as well? If that was the case, for consistency we'd also have to add -elfv1 for the BE v1 case. I was just going to add -elfv2 for the new variant. Thanks, Nick =