From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-x241.google.com (mail-pg0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3tPRQH1xv7zDw8l for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:42:31 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-pg0-x241.google.com with SMTP id x23so2503671pgx.3 for ; Wed, 23 Nov 2016 20:42:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:42:17 +1100 From: Nicholas Piggin To: Segher Boessenkool Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Alan Modra Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] powerpc/64be: use ELFv2 ABI for big endian kernels Message-ID: <20161124154217.1374b125@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20161123143834.GB6099@gate.crashing.org> References: <20161123130840.1877-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <20161123143834.GB6099@gate.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 08:38:34 -0600 Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:08:40AM +1100, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > Question, are there any fundamental reasons we shouldn't use the ELFv2 > > ABI to build big endian kernels if the compiler supports it? > > No one uses ELFv2 for BE in production, and it isn't thoroughly tested > at all, not even regularly tested. "Not supported", as far as GCC is > concerned (or any of the distros AFAIK). > > There are no fundamental reasons of course, ABIs are largely just > conventions, not laws of nature. That's a very good reason! I didn't think of that, I'll drop the idea. Thanks, Nick