This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: modified x86 ABI

From: David Taylor <dtaylor at emc dot com>
To: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
Cc: Mark Shinwell <shinwell at codesourcery dot com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Darryl L. Miles" <darryl-mailinglists at netbauds dot net>, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>, Seongbae Park (ëìë, ææå) <seongbae dot park at gmail dot com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:56:03 -0400
Subject: Re: modified x86 ABI
References: <5787cf470710230107m38d910cal42a140897d65d6f1@mail.gmail.com> <471DBD9B.2020600@codesourcery.com> <hoir4ytbh6.fsf@reger.suse.de>

> From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:40:53 +0200
> 
> One interesting question to me is what is the ABI like compared to the
> x86-64 ABI?  Did you just change the size of the types or did you change
> others as well, e.g. calling conventions?=20=20

Brief answer: x86_64 ABI with minor changes -- primarily just change
sizes to the 32 bit ABI sizes.  Use x86_64 calling conventions (e.g.,
pass first few args in registers rather than use the stack).

> Do you need new binutils for this?  A new C library?

Truly minor binutils changes.  If you wanted to use it with GNU/Linux
or the like, you would need a new C library.  For us, our application
is embedded, so we just compile the world in the new mode.

> Andreas

David

References:
- Re: modified x86 ABI
  - From: Uros Bizjak
- Re: modified x86 ABI
  - From: Mark Shinwell
- Re: modified x86 ABI
  - From: Andreas Jaeger

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]