Re: [Patch, AArch64, ILP32] 5/5 Define _ILP32 and __ILP32__

[Yufeng Zhang <Yufeng dot Zhang at arm dot com>]

On 06/27/13 20:28, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2013, Yufeng Zhang wrote:
>
> > We need a reliable way to tell we are compiling for ILP32.  On one hand LLP64
> > support may be added in the future; on the other hand, not all AArch64
>
> If thinking of adding a third ABI, that suggests you should be using
> something along the lines of _MIPS_SIM - a macro that's always defined,
> with an integer value depending on the ABI in used.
>
> > compilers may define _LP64 and __LP64__.
>
> Why should all such compilers define the ILP32 macros, but not all define
> the LP64 macros?  Do you have an AArch64 equivalent of the ACLE that
> specifies such things?

There will be ACLE for AArch64 and it is in the view that both macros 
will be specified.

Since a few other ports that support ILP32 have already defined these 
macros, it shall help the code porting with them defined for AArch64 as 
well.

> > Other ports like x86_64, ia64-hpux and pa-hpux also define one or both.
>
> If multiple ports define something, that might be an indication for
> defining it in target-independent code (like _LP64) rather than repeating
> it for more targets.

I can propose a patch later to have _ILP32 and __ILP32__ defined in the 
target-independent code instead and see if the community like it?

Thanks,
Yufeng