Hi Geert, On Mon, 2025-06-16 at 14:29 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Adrian, > > On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 at 14:21, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I wrote that message on Friday. Odd that your email client claims it was > > sent today. > > Besides that, I would like to point again at what John Klos wrote in reply > > to Finn [1]. > > The increased email traffic during the Linux kernel merge window > causes lots of delayed email :-(
Hmm, I see. Let's cool this discussion down a bit and summarize what we got so far: To summarize: - the ELF header provides provides the e_ident and e_flags fields which could be used for identifying a Linux/m68k system using the 4 bytes alignment ABI - MIPS uses e_flags for differentiating its ABIs - PA-RISC sets e_ident to 0x03 (Linux) while every other arch uses 0x00 (SysV ABI) - qemu-user needs to be patched to deal with the changed alignment (include/user/abitypes.h) - the kernel needs to be patched to deal with the changed alignment (arch/m68k/kernel/signal.c) - NetBSD uses an emulation layer which allows 2 bytes alignment a.out executables on an ELF system with 4 bytes alignment - glibc needs to be patched in sysdeps/m68k/utmp-size.h - gcc needs to be patched in gcc/config/m68k/linux.h (BIGGEST_ALIGNMENT to 64, EMPTY_FIELD_BOUNDARY and STACK_BOUNDARY to 32, see netbsd-elf.h) - the glibc and gcc testsuites should be run in a 4 bytes alignment to check for regressions Anything else I'm missing? Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer `. `' Physicist `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
