Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 15:49:36 +0000 From: mzpqnxow <musl@...qnxow.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Are there plans to support the "old" ABI (apcs-gnu) for ARM? I suppose what really kills me is the different system calling convention on Linux 2.4 (which in my case seems a hard requirement) not just the instruction set- but I realize now that musl does not aim to support 2.4 (which is perfectly reasonable, same as not supporting the ARM OABI- total obsolescence) Thanks again for the details and the ld flags, I wasn't familiar with them, I might be able to hack around things between the linker trick and a (pretty involved) binary patching or patches to musl I can whip up- lots of fun! I'll GPL whatever I come up with in case anyone else is interested but I realize it won't go into musl upstream without someone to support it. I don't have the time or expertise for bugfixes and/or QA, so that won't happen in sure. Unfortunately in my case I'm stuck on Linux 2.4 and ARM OABI for this "project" :/ I wonder if there's an easy way to work around requiring the NSS libs by just patching uClibc.. I was able to build what I needed with an older GCC and uClibc, aside from the NSS libs static linking warnings (sorry, a little off topic now) On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 18:45 Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 12:05:51AM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > * mzpqnxow <musl@...qnxow.com> [2017-05-01 16:11:10 -0400]: > > > I've seen it documented in several places that the so-called "old" ABI > for > > > ARM (formally referred to as apcs-gnu, I believe) is not supported by > musl, > > > though I haven't seen any formal explanation as to why. I'm wondering > if > > > this is a design decision that has already been made or if it is just > very > > > low priority on the TODO list- but might be implemented some day. I > have a > > > need for an ARM OABI toolchain that allows me to statically link a good > > > amount of non-trivial executables and uClibc, glibc, etc. don't work > for > > > me, mainly due to the reliance upon functions in the nss libraries > which > > > need dynamic loading to function correctly. > > > > > > So I'm curious, will this "old" ARM ABI ever be supported/implemented > in > > > musl or is it dead enough "in the wild" that it will never be > implemented? > > > Also, if there is some way that I am missing something and the old ABI > *is* > > > supported, I'd be happy for someone on the list to point out how I > missed > > > it. > > > > > > A simple yes/no would be terrific, I don't need a long explanation of > how > > > obsolete and slow the old ABI is- I am painfully aware. But here I am > :> > > > > oabi would be a completely new port (even the syscall abi > > and type representations are different, not just the pcs) > > > > and it would be more work than a normal port because oabi > > has mixed endian double representation and the math code > > is not prepared for that (most double prec math code would > > need some fix). > > > > it's unlikely to be supported any time soon > > I would add that it's unlikely to be accepted upstream since it's > obsolete and doesn't even have any maintained compilers that can > produce code for it (gcc dropped it years ago). If you need pre-armv4t > support, the right solution would be using -Wl,--fix-v4bx or maybe > -Wl,--fix-v4bx-interworking. > > I'm not sure if there's an easy way to get old oabi kernels to run > such code; it's probably not too bad if you have the kernel source and > can rebuild, but may be quite hard if you can't easily replace the > kernel. > > Rich > Content of type "text/html" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.