On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 15:51:20 +0530, nidhi mittal hada said: > *for x86_64 architecture and linux as operating system , GCC as compiler , > the calling convention to be followed is AMD64 ABI.* > right? > > *My doubt is :-* > 1) Is the above statement true only for stack frames function call etc ? > OR > Is the above statement true for other things related to architecture, > like for knowing data type sizes, endianness, alignment .. > > as http://www.uclibc.org/docs/psABI-x86_64.pdf, mentions , data type size > alignment etc everything ... > are these things same for AMD and x86 architecture both ??? AMD developed the 64-bit extensions, Intel adopted them as well. The two architectures are identical for alignment, word sizes, opcodes, and all that stuff, until you get to truly processor-dependent things like whether it has SSE3, SSE4, SSE42 extension opcodes, specific MSRs that are only available on certain family/model/stepping, and so on. So unless you're looking at *very specific* things like "Does this particular Intel i5 chipset have the VT-D extension?" or "how does this CPU handle on the fly firmware updates?" you can treat the AMD and Intel 64-bit architectures the same. By the time you're looking at *that* level of detail, there's more difference between an Intel Atom N4xx and an Intel Sandy Bridge-based Xeon than there is between Intel and AMD, even though they're all able to run x86_64. And if you're doing *that* sort of coding, you want to go look at how the code that handles the /proc/cpuinfo pseudo-file handles the the 'flags' line, and how code uses the bits presented there, and how the kernel determines which cpufreq driver to use, and so on...
Attachment:
pgp_6BxuOu1t2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
