Am 28.05.2011 um 13:50 schrieb Alexander Graf:
On 28.05.2011, at 13:48, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 28.05.2011 um 13:42 schrieb Alexander Graf:
On 28.05.2011, at 13:37, Andreas Färber wrote:
To avoid some of the cell size vs. pointer size issues, use 64-bit cells on ppc64. Suggested by Segher.
This involves handling lack of 128-bit type and compiling 64-bit libgcc parts, copied from sparc64.
Hopefully fixes compilation on 64-bit host, too.
I thought ppc64 OpenFirmware uses 32bit cells?
That's what I thought, too... but Segher said otherwise in January, and Tarl said the internal cell size (that I'm trying to change here) were different from the guest-visible 32-bit cell size. Through the use of prog_arg_t the CIF is supposed to remain 32-bit.
Oh, too quick in replying :). You're changing the "cell" type which is used all over the place with sizeof() to figure out the cell size of guest visible (device tree) fields. I don't see how it could not be guest exposed.
So you're saying...? Do you oppose Segher? Or do you see a better way of doing this? :) Blue and Kenneth were having compilation issues due to pointer size != cell size, and I hoped this might solve the iso9660 issue (which it doesn't, unless I have missed some change).
Andreas