This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: X32 psABI status

From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
To: Florian Weimer <fw at deneb dot enyo dot de>
Cc: x32-abi at googlegroups dot com, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, LKML <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2011 05:45:21 -0800
Subject: Re: X32 psABI status
References: <AANLkTikgfv+L9WS4s6n5mQcXWTzc6YMNUSsgBiAOmKbE@mail.gmail.com><87aai1gdr7.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de><4D5711E0.7020306@zytor.com><87r5bcnwvw.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>

On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:48 AM, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
> * H. Peter Anvin:
>
>> On 02/12/2011 01:10 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> Why is the ia32 compatiblity kernel interface used?
>>
>> Because there is no way in hell we're designing in a second
>> compatibility ABI in the kernel (and it has to be a compatibility ABI,
>> because of the pointer size difference.)
>
> Actually, I'm wondering if you can do the translation in user space.
> There already are 32-on-64 implementations in existence, without
> kernel changes (recent Hotspot, LuaJIT, and probably some more).

Please check out the x32 kernel source and provide feedback.

-- 
H.J.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: X32 psABI status
  - From: Florian Weimer

References:
- X32 psABI status
  - From: H.J. Lu
- Re: X32 psABI status
  - From: Florian Weimer
- Re: X32 psABI status
  - From: H. Peter Anvin
- Re: X32 psABI status
  - From: Florian Weimer

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]