The Linux binutils vs. the FSF binutils on Linux/mips
FYI, the Linux binutils contains a 64bit MIPS ELF patch which doesn't exist in the FSF binutils. At first, I thought this 64bit MIPS ELF patch shouldn't affect the 32bit MIPS ELF. But for some reason, I cannot get a stable 32bit Linux/mips kernel without this 64bit MIPS ELF patch. I compared kernels generated by 2 linkers from the same input. They are identical. Then I compared the object files generated from 2 assemblers. Some of them are different. Here is one example:
tmp/1 renamed from tmp/2 +13 -12
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ -../linux-mips-0914/./net/socket.o: file format elf32-tradlittlemips +./net/socket.o: file format elf32-tradlittlemips Disassembly of section .text:
@@ -2475,14 +2475,15 @@ Disassembly of section .text.init: 60: 02002021 move a0,s0 64: 3c010000 lui at,0x0 64: R_MIPS_HI16 .bss - 68: 0c000000 jal 0 <sock_init> - 68: R_MIPS_26 rtnetlink_init - 6c: ac220084 sw v0,132(at) - 6c: R_MIPS_LO16 .bss - 70: 0c000000 jal 0 <sock_init> - 70: R_MIPS_26 init_netlink - 74: 00000000 nop - 78: 8fbf0014 lw ra,20(sp) - 7c: 8fb00010 lw s0,16(sp) - 80: 03e00008 jr ra - 84: 27bd0018 addiu sp,sp,24 + 68: ac220084 sw v0,132(at) + 68: R_MIPS_LO16 .bss + 6c: 0c000000 jal 0 <sock_init> + 6c: R_MIPS_26 rtnetlink_init + 70: 00000000 nop + 74: 0c000000 jal 0 <sock_init> + 74: R_MIPS_26 init_netlink + 78: 00000000 nop + 7c: 8fbf0014 lw ra,20(sp) + 80: 8fb00010 lw s0,16(sp) + 84: 03e00008 jr ra + 88: 27bd0018 addiu sp,sp,24
It seems that those small differences between 2 assemblers make a big difference for the Linux/mips kernel. Does anyone know why?
H.J.
Quoted 3 lines
It seems that those small differences between 2 assemblers make a big difference for the Linux/mips kernel. Does anyone know why?
Dunno, what's the change.
-eric
Signature · 1 line
Look out behind you!