Re: x32 abi support?
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2012/5/16 Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)gmail.com>:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Neal Becker <ndbecker2(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> I noticed this article:
>>
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTEwMTk
>>
>> Has this been discussed on fedora?
>
> Not that I've seen. Also, the article is either incomplete or
> incorrect, as full x32 support for glibc hasn't landed yet. Upstream
> is still working on that and it might get in for glibc-2.16.
>
> If this were to come to Fedora, I would expect it to start as a
> secondary architecture.
Secondary arch suggests the whole fedora collection is built with x32 ABI.
But there is one noticeable exception with that; as I understood:the
kernel will anyway "remains" at x86_64.
The kernel is x86_64, with support for the x32 ABI, yes.
So that make me wonder if we really need to built the whole
collection
as x32 ? Or if we only wants a selection of components to be optimized
by x32. For example does it matter to move the whole Xorg server
infrastructure as x32 or is it possible to leave it as x86_64 ? or is
there any benifit for the move to x32 in this area ?
You can't link x32 binaries against i686/x86_64 libraries, etc. You
need entirely separate userspace. From a Fedora perspective, the way
to do that is to add an architecture to koji and build whatever you
want. That arch add should start as secondary.
josh