[parisc-linux] Assembly Language Changes

[Sam Creasey]

On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Philipp Rumpf wrote:

> Hello,
> over the last few days or so, I have been trying to get glibc to build and
> work for a Linux/PA-RISC target.  I came to believe it would be simpler to
> change certain aspects of the assembly language used than to keep working
> around them:

At least in the ELF toolchain (which, I think we did change the kernel
over to, didn't we?)  I've already begun freely banging the assembler
syntax into a more gas-like format...   

> The advantages to changing the assembly dialect we use are that using cpp
> to pre-process assembly instructions becomes a lot simpler (glibc makes
> heavy use of this);  the assembly language looks more similar to those
> used for other architectures that run Linux;  there is no difference
> between the pa1.1 and pa2.0 versions.

Agreed.  The original workarounds in the kernel were rather hideous, and
prevented us fron doing quite a few useful things.  (initcalls, anybody?)

Maximum software build support good.

> The disadvantage, obviously, is that we would need to keep separate
> binaries around to compile HP/UX assembly source;  also, the assembly
> files used by the kernel would need to be converted (and probably get
> readable to more people in the process).

Hmph...  I'm not sure how many people working on the port hold a deep
value in the ability to recompile HP/UX apps (or, in this case,
reassemble).  Just run the damn HP assembler if you feel a deep need to
run HP programs under the linux kernel (imho).

-- Sam