Eric Christopher wrote: > On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 05:52, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, Eric Christopher wrote: > > > > > > But mips64 kernel assumes that the kernel itself is compiled with > > > > "-mabi=64". For example, some asm routines pass more than 4 arguments > > > > via aN registers. > > > > > > Yes, but then you aren't abi compliant are you? If you want n64 then say > > > n64. If you want o32 extended to 64-bit registers then use o64. > > > > I think "-mabi=64" is OK (I use it for over a year now) and for those > > worried of every byte of precious memory, "-mabi=n32 -mlong64" might be > > the right long-term answer (although it might require verifying if tools > > handle it right). Given the experimental state of the 64-bit kernel it > > should be OK to be less forgiving on a requirement for recent tools. > > OK as in "it works for me", and OK as in "this is the correct usage" are > two different things. I believe that for a 64-bit kernel either -mabi=64 > or -mabi=n32 (-mlong64) are the right long term answer, A third answer is to add a -msign-extend-addresses switch in the assembler. Together with -mabi=64 this would produce optimized ELF64 output. > part of Daniel's > problem was that his bootloader couldn't deal with ELF64. Well, implementing an ELF64 bootloader ins't that hard. :-) Thiemo
