On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@novell.com> wrote: >>>> On 16.02.11 at 21:04, "H. Peter Anvin" <h...@zytor.com> wrote: >> On 02/16/2011 11:22 AM, H.J. Lu wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I updated x32 psABI draft to version 0.2 to change x32 library path >>> from lib32 to libx32 since lib32 is used for ia32 libraries on Debian, >>> Ubuntu and other derivative distributions. The new x32 psABI is >>> available from: >>> >>> https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/home >>> >> >> I'm wondering if we should define a section header flag (sh_flags) >> and/or an ELF header flag (e_flags) for x32 for the people unhappy about >> keying it to the ELF class... > > Thanks for supporting this!
I am not convinced. > Besides that I also wonder why all the 64-bit relocations get > marked as LP64-only. It is clear that some of them can be useful > in ILP32 as well, and there's no reason to preclude future uses > even if currently no-one can imagine any. We can revisit them when someone finds a use for them. > Furthermore, it seems questionable to continue to require rela > relocations when for all normal ones (leaving aside the 8- and 16- > bit ones) the addend can fit in the relocated field. Rela is much nicer to work with. > Finally, shouldn't R_X86_64_GLOB_DAT and R_X86_64_JUMP_SLOT Fixed in git. > also have a field specifier of wordclass rather than word64 (though > 'wordclass' by itself would probably be wrong if the tying of the ABI > to the ELF class was eliminated)? And how about R_X86_64_*TP*64 > and R_X86_64_TLSDESC? Those are 64bits due to the way the code sequence generated by gcc. -- H.J.
