-----Original Message----- From: Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 08:16 To: Kinsey Moore <kinsey.mo...@oarcorp.com>; devel@rtems.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] spec/aarch64: Only apply SUBALIGN(4) to ILP32
>On 13/11/2020 15:13, Kinsey Moore wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sebastian Huber<sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> >> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 04:26 >> To: Kinsey Moore<kinsey.mo...@oarcorp.com>;devel@rtems.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] spec/aarch64: Only apply SUBALIGN(4) to ILP32 >> >>> On 12/11/2020 14:32, Kinsey Moore wrote: >>> >>>> The SUBALIGN(4) required on rtemsroset and rtemsrwset for ILP32 >>>> builds was previously present on LP64 builds and causes no issues >>>> within RTEMS, but causes relocation/alignment issues when building libbsd. >>>> This restricts those alignment changes to ILP32 builds. >>> The SUBALIGN() is currently only used on aarch64 in RTEMS. Why is it >>> necessary? The PowerPC port for example uses a single linkcmds.base for the >>> 32-bit and 64-bit without a SUBALIGN(). >> The SUBALIGN was necessary because the default alignment was 8 bytes and the >> ILP32 code would fail during initialization while iterating over the linker >> sets since the upper half-word of every address was zeroed out and was being >> treated as another init call. Is there a preferred way to accomplish this >> that doesn't involve SUBALIGN? > > Why can't you remove all the SUBALIGN() from the linker script? > > For example > > aarch64-rtems6-ld --verbose | grep SUBALIGN > > has no output. That output is specifically for LP64 AArch64. ILP32 linker scripts have different OUTPUT_ARCH and OUTPUT_FORMAT directives. I wasn't able to get aarch64-rtems6-ld to output an ILP32 default linker script. Kinsey _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
