2011/2/13 Petr Baudis <pa...@suse.cz>: > On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 07:13:57AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Florian Weimer <f...@deneb.enyo.de> wrote: >> > * H. J. Lu: >> > >> >>> Actually, I'm wondering if you can do the translation in user space. >> >>> There already are 32-on-64 implementations in existence, without >> >>> kernel changes (recent Hotspot, LuaJIT, and probably some more). >> >> >> >> Please check out the x32 kernel source and provide feedback. >> > >> > I still don't understand why you need a separate syscall table. You >> > should really be able to run on an unmodified amd64 kernel, in 64 bit >> >> That is done on purpose. x32 is designed for environments where the >> current ia32 API is sufficient. You can think it as ia32 with register >> extended to 64bit plus 8 more registers. Everything else is still 32bit. > > I think it would be great if you could add some text like this plus some > rationale (AIUI, this is geared mainly at new Atoms and other x86_64 > embedded platforms) to the document.
I updated: https://sites.google.com/site/x32abi/ > (BTW, it is not really convincing to me that such a niche is worth all > the trouble this is going to bring.) > That is a good question. Otherwise x32 would have been implemented long time ago. -- H.J.
