Marking ia64 psABI conformance (Re: PATCH: Support the .note.GNU-property section)

Richard Henderson
Fri Jun 6 05:38:00 GMT 2003

On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 03:11:37PM -0700, H. J. Lu wrote:
> > Anyway, for something this platform specific, you might as well use
> > an e_flags bit.
> It is no binary compatible.

We're ALREADY talking about an ABI incompatibility.  How does it make
more sense to hide this incompatibility in some random magic section?

> Please keep in mind this only affects .o files, executables and
> DSOs are ok.

What has this got to do with anything?

> It doesn't make senses to
> ask everyone to upgrade their whole IA64 system just to support
> the ia64 psABI conforming .o files generated by the new gcc.

I see ZERO difference between your note section and using a bit
in the e_flags.  Except that yours is more convoluted, and less
obvious that it is NOT advisory, unlike the execstack bit.

Please do not bother posting your patch again until the larger
community has come to some consensus on this point.


More information about the Gcc mailing list