This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC: mips target support for Juniper Apollo
- From: cgd at broadcom dot com
- To: wilson at specifixinc dot com
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 10 Mar 2004 10:11:29 -0800
- Subject: Re: RFC: mips target support for Juniper Apollo
- References: <1078905508.25545.99.camel@leaf.tuliptree.org><mailpost.1078905546.10274@news-sj1-1>
At Wed, 10 Mar 2004 07:59:06 +0000 (UTC), "Jim Wilson" wrote:
> It is also missing branch delay slots. This is a serious
> incompatibility which requires having separate magic numbers for Apollo,
> as it won't be compatible with anything else.
>
> I'm concerned about the choice of the magic numbers. I don't want to
> conflict with number that Red Hat is using, but only a Red Hat employee
> can check that. This primarily means E_MIPS_MACH_APOLLO in the
> include/elf/mips.h file.
Uh, except that the magic numbers E_MIPS_MACH_* are not actually
*used* for anything on most/all MIPS ELF systems, since they are not
actually standard. I.e., You've solved this problem from a toolchain
perspective, but not an OS perspective.
>From an OS perspective, it either needs a different E_MIPS_ARCH value
(which i don't think is appropriate, since it's not actually
MIPS-comptable... at least for code which uses branches and jumps 8-),
or a different EM_* (e_machine) value.
It *really* *really* *really* should have a different E_MACHINE value,
since it is *fundamentally* incompatible with MIPS.
(Whether or not it should ever call itself "mips" in binutils is
another question, and one that could get fairly ugly.)
cgd