Atsushi Nemoto wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 23:31:57 -0400, Kumba <kumba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Well, o64 went away as we all know. It was never a favourable
> > option for very good reasons (although I used it right up until it
> > died and I was forced off of it). The replacement for it, that was
> > more preferred and resulted in similar code was building a kernel
> > for any of these three systems using CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64 + -msym32
> > (auto selected in the Makefile) + the make vmlinux.32 target. I
> > believe this method is what Debian uses for building their mips
> > kernels for SGI systems, but don't quote me on that. If someone
> > from Debian wants to comment, please do.
>
> The replacement is CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64=n (it adds -msym32 option) +
> CONFIG_BOOT_ELF32=y (it adds vmlinux.32 to "all" target). Not
> CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64=y.
>
> CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64=n enables -msym32 option, which means the kernel
> load address should be CKSEG0.
This sounds wrong to me, since CONFIG_BUILD_ELF64=n will build a
ELF64 kernel (from compiler/linker POV). This tricks people into
believing they need no ELF64 capable toolchain for a 64bit kernel.
IMO -msym32 should depend on:
((Compiler can do -msym32)
&& (load address is in ckseg0)
&& CONFIG_64BIT)
which obsoletes the whole CONFIG_BUILD_ELF* stuff.
Thiemo
