From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Thu Jul 11 19:35:44 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E428515DC2D4 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 19:35:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adr@SDF.ORG) Received: from mx.sdf.org (ol.sdf.org [205.166.94.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.sdf.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EB1B8E20D for ; Thu, 11 Jul 2019 19:35:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adr@SDF.ORG) Received: from sdf.lonestar.org (IDENT:adr@sdf.lonestar.org [205.166.94.16]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id x6BJZYGQ003761 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Thu, 11 Jul 2019 19:35:34 GMT Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 19:35:34 +0000 (UTC) From: adr X-X-Sender: adr@sdf.lonestar.org To: Mark Millard cc: Robert Crowston via freebsd-arm Subject: Re: FreeBSD arm EABI5 documentation? In-Reply-To: <15BCB15A-6A7F-4070-A6CF-AEF8BBD2F0BE@yahoo.com> Message-ID: References: <1788e13e706b9fdaf610e4ddd671a5ed715f9dfe.camel@freebsd.org> <1CB61FE0-5665-424F-8B94-ABFC06906112@yahoo.com> <15BCB15A-6A7F-4070-A6CF-AEF8BBD2F0BE@yahoo.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (NEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4EB1B8E20D X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.52 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.87)[-0.871,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.59)[0.595,0]; IP_SCORE(-0.44)[ip: (-1.42), ipnet: 205.166.94.0/24(-0.71), asn: 14361(-0.05), country: US(-0.06)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[SDF.ORG]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.65)[-0.648,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[mx.SDF.ORG]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[20.94.166.205.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[yahoo.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14361, ipnet:205.166.94.0/24, country:US]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 19:35:44 -0000 > Sorry that I offended. I only contacted them because I ran into Caaame ooon... I'm not offended. What's wrong these days, people don't have sense of humor anymore? > Oh, so it's not that netbsd and linux have different stack alignment > requirements, it's just that you accidentally never called a function > with an unaligned stack where the misalignment caused a problem. There > are only a few instructions that really require 64-bit data alignment > when the strict alignment enforcement flag is off (it's off in all 3 > OSes we're talking about). You could probably call most of the C > library functions and luck out on the alignment. That's the reason I was asking explicitly for FreeBSD calling conventions. Remember, the code I'm talking about is a forth implementation (self-modifying code) and I use a lot of SDL2 functions for portability. That's why I think this is more likely a clang vs gcc issue. Anyway thanks to both of you for your interest, I've been here for a few days only and you have made me feel on home already. Regards, adr.