From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BC621F4C1 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:41:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.b="WqAiT8KR"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B0A38582AB for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:41:12 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 08B0A38582AB DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1669794072; bh=Rh2ldz8JxLT/ZLrzUPNCjVtv+ziu/zl+pSQWVg6q2Ys=; h=To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=WqAiT8KR/uZo5lIthC2QxbXoS4gPTfK9xkPlHpuLkm3gvDSeSYLLl4jZKM0umLbGT eZfjoHj+TC9YFQLynfU7LLyKmrrPyBc1L1jkK3lyzdYOoACQUFDtJ35YNzPRBPf46O Ua6nf64wBQn2nYy/Bx76WtUtl27LXKbQZzuWhyyw= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6222B3858D28 for ; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:40:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 6222B3858D28 Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-550-Q7H5QxTfObuZBY8s8ERd5A-1; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 02:40:49 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Q7H5QxTfObuZBY8s8ERd5A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12B0A185A7A3; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:40:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.98]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 664AB1121314; Wed, 30 Nov 2022 07:40:47 +0000 (UTC) To: Xi Ruoyao Cc: caiyinyu , adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, i.swmail@xen0n.name, xuchenghua@loongson.cn Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Use medium cmodel build libc_nonshared.a. In-Reply-To: <33054b9098f4ef690cd1639e96b2c148e9e9e490.camel@xry111.site> (Xi Ruoyao's message of "Wed, 23 Nov 2022 19:18:18 +0800") References: <20221123070905.1618136-1-caiyinyu@loongson.cn> <87zgcim07m.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <33054b9098f4ef690cd1639e96b2c148e9e9e490.camel@xry111.site> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 08:40:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87sfi099fo.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.3 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Florian Weimer Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces+e=80x24.org@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" * Xi Ruoyao: > On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 11:31 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >> But shouldn't the medium model be the GCC default if it is required for >> building applications? > > Small code model can support a 128MiB .text section, and most > applications have a .text section < 128MiB. But Firefox libxul.so can > be extremely large. > > It's not worthy to pay the cost everywhere just for satisfying a > monster application. I see, I wasn't aware that the limit was that large. Thanks, Florian