From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ausmtp04.au.ibm.com (ausmtp04.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.152]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "ausmtp04.au.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11DE5DDF45 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:43:31 +1100 (EST) Received: from sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (d23rh904.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.202]) by ausmtp04.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l1ENwwhL288688 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:59:00 +1100 Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (d23av02.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.243]) by sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.2) with ESMTP id l1ENkqnR138656 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:46:53 +1100 Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av02.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l1ENhMu1001013 for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:43:23 +1100 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:05:05 +1100 From: David Gibson To: Josh Boyer Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/16] Early serial debug support for PPC44x Message-ID: <20070214230505.GA16279@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070213061024.DA1ABDDD0C@ozlabs.org> <1171379087.4003.40.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20070214001622.GB11491@localhost.localdomain> <20070214010235.GB19430@crusty.rchland.ibm.com> <20070214010044.GG11491@localhost.localdomain> <20070214020012.GB8541@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20070214020251.GI11491@localhost.localdomain> <20070214023846.GC8541@bubble.grove.modra.org> <1171467708.4003.92.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1171467708.4003.92.camel@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 09:41:48AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 13:08 +1030, Alan Modra wrote: > > > > > > > > I would guess that this isn't a matter of how old the assembler is, > > > > but how the assembler was built. If built on a 32-bit host with no > > > > 64-bit targets supported, then most internal assembler variables > > > > are 32-bit and 64-bit constants are not handled very well. > > > > > > > > You probably should avoid 64-bit expressions on a 32-bit target. > > > > > > Well, yes, but how. > > > > No idea, but I haven't even looked at the code in question. I'm just > > pointing out the toolchain limitation. It sounds like what you've > > done requires that people build their binutils with > > --enable-64-bit-bfd or choose support for an extra 64-bit target, > > eg. --enable-targets=powerpc64-linux > > Yes, that seems to be the case. I built a powerpc64 cross toolchain > this morning and recompiled the kernel. It worked just fine. > > But I also think we want to avoid requiring that in peoples toolchains. > I'll see if we can't accomplish what we're trying to do some other way > without being too ugly. Ugh. Yeah, we're going to have to do something. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson