[gentoo-sparc] Why is a simple hello world in 64 bit assembly program 65k bytes long?

[gentoo-sparc] Why is a simple hello world in 64 bit assembly program 65k bytes long?

[Alex Buell]

My code:
.equ SYSCALL_EXIT, 1
.equ SYSCALL_WRITE, 4

.equ STDIN, 0
.equ STDOUT, 1
.equ STDERR, 2

        .align 4
        .global _start

_start:
        mov STDOUT, %o0
        set string, %o1
        mov 14, %o2
        mov SYSCALL_WRITE, %g1
        ta 0x10

        mov 0, %o0
        mov SYSCALL_EXIT, %g1
        ta 0x10

        .align 4

string:
.ascii  "Hello world!\n"

How I build it:
as -64 -o hello.o hello.s
ld -e _start --oformat=elf64-sparc -o hello hello.o
ld: warning: sparc:v9 architecture of input file `hello.o' is
incompatible with sparc output strip hello

file hello
hello: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, SPARC V9, version 1 (SYSV),
statically linked, stripped

ls -l
total 24
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 66032 2006-12-26 14:39 hello
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  1056 2006-12-26 14:39 hello.o
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   296 2006-12-25 10:07 hello.s
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   187 2006-12-25 10:27 Makefile

Why is the hello executable 66,032 bytes long?
-- 
http://www.munted.org.uk

You've been eating the cat food again, haven't you?
-- 
gentoo-sparc@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-sparc] Why is a simple hello world in 64 bit assembly program 65k bytes long?

[Alex Buell]

My code:
.equ SYSCALL_EXIT, 1
.equ SYSCALL_WRITE, 4

.equ STDIN, 0
.equ STDOUT, 1
.equ STDERR, 2

        .align 4
        .global _start

_start:
        mov STDOUT, %o0
        set string, %o1
        mov 14, %o2
        mov SYSCALL_WRITE, %g1
        ta 0x10

        mov 0, %o0
        mov SYSCALL_EXIT, %g1
        ta 0x10

        .align 4

string:
.ascii  "Hello world!\n"

How I build it:
as -64 -o hello.o hello.s
ld -e _start --oformat=elf64-sparc -o hello hello.o
ld: warning: sparc:v9 architecture of input file `hello.o' is
incompatible with sparc output strip hello

file hello
hello: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, SPARC V9, version 1 (SYSV),
statically linked, stripped

ls -l
total 24
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 66032 2006-12-26 14:39 hello
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  1056 2006-12-26 14:39 hello.o
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   296 2006-12-25 10:07 hello.s
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root   187 2006-12-25 10:27 Makefile

Why is the hello executable 66,032 bytes long?
-- 
http://www.munted.org.uk

Fearsome grindings.
-- 
gentoo-sparc@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-sparc] Why is a simple hello world in 64 bit assembly program 65k bytes long?

[Hamish Greig]

On Wednesday 03 January 2007 08:40, Alex Buell wrote:
<snip>

Have you tried a 32-bit program to see if it is the bits or the code ?
Have you tried a 32-bit and 64-bit simple c program to see if it is an 
assembly problem and not a 64-bit problem ?

I understand you are an experienced programmer and might have already tried 
these things, I ask only because you don't mention any details of having 
investigated the problem prior to emailing the list.
You would problably have more replies on the binutils or gcc lists, although 
without evidence that you have investigated the problem somewhat, they might 
also not respond, not knowing what technical level of response you will 
understand.

Of course, all of this is just my humble opinion, I offer it hoping to have 
your question answered instead of popping back into my inbox next week.

hgg
-- 
gentoo-sparc@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-sparc] Why is a simple hello world in 64 bit assembly program 65k bytes long?

[Alex Buell]

On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 09:12:43 +1100, I waved a wand and this message
magically appears in front of Hamish Greig:

> Have you tried a 32-bit program to see if it is the bits or the code ?
> Have you tried a 32-bit and 64-bit simple c program to see if it is
> an assembly problem and not a 64-bit problem ?

I did compile a 32 bit version of the same code; it was just 1k. I
think it might be pulling in unnecessary stuff.

> I understand you are an experienced programmer and might have already
> tried these things, I ask only because you don't mention any details
> of having investigated the problem prior to emailing the list.
> You would problably have more replies on the binutils or gcc lists,
> although without evidence that you have investigated the problem
> somewhat, they might also not respond, not knowing what technical
> level of response you will understand.

Yeah, thanks, I will ask on the more specific Sparc mailing lists
rather than the Gentoo lists.

The reason why I ask is because I want to help to get 64bit userland
upand running on my Ultra 2, I was thinking along the lines of having a
mix of 32bit and 64bit userland stuff. 
-- 
http://www.munted.org.uk

Fearsome grindings.
-- 
gentoo-sparc@gentoo.org mailing list