Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2010 14:48:41 +0100 From: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@freebsd.org> To: Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-projects@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r216200 - in projects/binutils-2.17: contrib/binutils/bfd contrib/binutils/gas/config contrib/binutils/ld/emulparams gnu/usr.bin/binutils/libbfd sys/boot/ia64/efi sys/boot/ia64/ski sys/... Message-ID: <201012071448.47319.tijl@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4CFD2E01.1000509@FreeBSD.org> References: <201012052024.oB5KOMUF007051@svn.freebsd.org> <201012061718.13823.tijl@coosemans.org> <4CFD2E01.1000509@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart1405737.0elAEnjU74
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Monday 06 December 2010 19:40:01 Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2010-12-06 17:18, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>> On Sunday 05 December 2010 21:24:22 Dimitry Andric wrote:
> ...
>>> For ia64, add a proper 'elf64-ia64-freebsd' output format to BFD, so=
the
>>> ELF branding for FreeBSD is done in the same way as amd64, i386 and
>>> sparc. Something similar should probably also be done for arm, mips=
and
>>> powerpc.
> ...
>> About elf64-ia64-freebsd, I'm not sure it is needed. FreeBSD 4.0 and
>> older used non-standard ELF branding and that format got the name
>> elf32-i386-freebsd (and elf64-alpha-freebsd). Later versions of FreeBSD
>> use the standard method, but keep calling it elf32-i386-freebsd.
>=20
> The problem is that BFD needs to set the ELF_OSABI field in the ELF
> header to ELFOSABI_FREEBSD, at least for FreeBSD targets (whereas Linux
> does not care about the ELF_OSABI field at all, it seems).
>=20
> Because BFD sets the ELF_OSABI field to ELFOSABI_SYSV by default, this
> can only be done properly by selecting a specific BFD target
> ("elf64-ia64-freebsd") which is different from the default, usually
> "elf64-ia64-little". The same principle applies to other arches.
I see. I thought target specifics were set at compile time, but
apparently BFD can target multiple formats at runtime.
>> Rather than copying this practise to other architectures, maybe
>> binutils should be fixed for i386. It isn't used on amd64 and sparc64
>> either as far as I can tell.
>=20
> It is, in the binutils-2.17 branch, which has . :) The question is if
> we want to propagate our elf.c hack forever, in which case it would
> have to be added to the binutils port.
>=20
> The alternative, adding FreeBSD-specific targets, is more likely to be
> accepted by the binutils maintainers, which would be nice if we want to
> be able to build with "stock" binutils on FreeBSD.
>=20
> I am completely open for both approaches, really, and would like to see
> a bit of consensus.
>=20
> The "just hack elf.c" approach causes less churn in the tree, because it
> is small, and saves modifying a few places in the tree where target
> names are used, such as kernel link scripts. There is no way to specify
> a "non-FreeBSD" target, though.
>=20
> The "add FreeBSD targets" approach causes a bit of churn, but if we
> submit the required changes to binutils upstream, they are more likely
> to be accepted, as they are fairly minimal, and don't disturb support
> for other platforms. There will also be the possibility to produce
> non-FreeBSD-branded ELF files, although I am not sure if that is used
> very often.
>=20
> So, which colour? :)
A third alternative :) Stop setting OSABI.
Looking at the binutils 2.20.1 BFD source the only files in which OSABI
is set to FreeBSD are: elf32-i386.c, elf64-alpha.c, elf64-sparc.c and
elf64-x86-64.c. For those architectures FreeBSD is the only OS that sets
OSABI. Since nobody cares about it maybe FreeBSD shouldn't either. The
field is redundant anyway given the .note.ABI-tag section.
I noticed the .note.ABI-tag section was missing from the ia64 startup
code (src/lib/csu/ia64/crt1.S). Adding it should fix the branding
problem reported on the mailing lists too and then there's no need for
hacks or special *-freebsd ELF formats.
--nextPart1405737.0elAEnjU74
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD)
iF4EABEIAAYFAkz+Oz8ACgkQfoCS2CCgtivrswD7BBND2H4gfh1r1LgvK7f+pkhU
0HZbdFXYRhrKjXhqUXAA/ihQXbhfcylL0dbf6VYFsLVfNtpdiFnuKkH9H9+aQJtU
=/rFy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart1405737.0elAEnjU74--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201012071448.47319.tijl>