On 08/05/15 15:25, Matthew Fortune wrote:
> H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 7:40 AM, Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.n...@arm.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21/04/15 15:59, Matthew Fortune wrote:
>>>> Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> writes:
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 01:58:02PM +0000, Matthew Fortune wrote:
>>>>>> There does however appear to be both soft and hard float variants
>>>
>>> Patch v2.
>>>
>>> Now all the ABI variants musl plans to support are represented.
>>>
>>> gcc/Changelog:
>>>
>>> 2015-04-27 Gregor Richards <gregor.richa...@uwaterloo.ca>
>>> Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.n...@arm.com>
>>>
>>> * config/mips/linux.h (MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKER32): Define.
>>> (MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKER64, MUSL_DYNAMIC_LINKERN32): Define.
>>> (GNU_USER_DYNAMIC_LINKERN32): Update.
>>
>> You checked in config/linux.h CHOOSE_DYNAMIC_LINKER change without
>> config/mips/linux.h change. Now linux-mips is broken.
>
> The MIPS patch is OK. I am concerned that you are aiming for one
> dynamic linker per ABI variant in musl but are not accounting for
> soft-float up front in n32/n64. There is time to reconsider this
> before any of this code gets to a versioned GCC release though.
>
i thought musl would not want to support soft float variants
of those abis, but now i think it does not hurt to add the -sf
there too.
if you think that's ok, i can now submit the patch with
%{msoft-float:-sf} added to all abi variants.
> I.e. as it stands this patch is not OK for backporting to GCC 5
> without further discussion.
>
> There is also the perspective that we should be able to aim for
> an ABI variant agnostic dynamic linker at some point over the next
> year by working towards a build that truly uses no float and is
> hence compatible with all the ABI variants.
i'm not sure what you mean by 'a build that truly uses no float'
i thought the direction is to have a potentially hard float abi
with kernel emulation when the fpu is not present.
>
> Thanks,
> Matthew
>
