Resurrecting hppa-elf
Jeffrey A Law
law@cygnus.com
Wed Apr 19 15:40:00 GMT 2000
In message < Pine.LNX.4.21.0004191316090.32725-100000@front.linuxcare.com.au >y
ou write:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>
> > The 32bit PA elf needs a *complete and total* rewrite. Anything based on
> > the old code is horribly broken.
> >
> > I've tried to explain the issues to HP & the puffins, but they weren't
> > particularly interested in listening to why the old 32 PA elf code was
> > totally inappropriate for their needs. I sincerely hope they didn't
> > resurrect the old stuff.
>
> That seems to be what has happened. I'm willing to spend quite a bit of
> time to rewrite it properly. Do you mind pointing me at an email archive
> with the above issues you tried to talk about, other than the puffin one,
> which I'm dredging through at the moment?
I don't think there's anything archived.
The single most important issue is to settle on a usable ABI.
The existing ABIs are:
32bit Portable runtime -- horribly inefficient.
32bit hpux (aka PA32) -- exists in the compiler. Horribly complex to
implement the necessary support in an ELF assembler/linker
(yes, the ABI has significant impacts on the assembler/linker).
PA64 Exists in the compiler. Marginal impact on the linker/assembler, but
is only suitable for wide mode.
I believe ultimately a new ABI will have to be defined that is suitable for
a linux port and which doesn't have all the braindamage found in the 32bit
hpux ABI. Once that's done and implemented, providing proper elf32-hppa
support isn't so bad since it'll look pretty normal.
> How far along is your elf64-hppa work?
It's done, but I doubt it's going to help you since it's got a lot of
hpux specific implementation details.
jeff
More information about the Binutils
mailing list