RE: dropping CONFIG_IA32_SUPPORT from ia64

From: Luck, Tony <tony.luck_at_intel.com>
Date: 2006-05-27 04:25:21
> Just for clarity, what platforms would be affected by this?  I thought
> the non-free software was needed for Montecito+, and that Madison
> worked fine w/o it.

You are correct.  All cpu implementations prior to "Montecito" have
h/w support for x86 instructions.  "Montecito" does not.  You'll
have to make your own bets and guesses about whether this would ever
be re-introduced.

> My vote is not to drop the "free" kernel support, though I'm also not
> offering to take over maintenance so it probably doesn't count for
> much.

"Freeze" is pretty much where it has been for a while.  This thread was
started by a patch that caught up all the missing x86 system calls. Even
though the handlers all point into generic code, I'm always a bit twitchy
about including code that hasn't been exercised even once.  This would be
a lot easier if people adding system calls provided at least an example
program that uses the call ... even better would be an actual test-suite
that runs through all the options and failure cases for the call.  But
the recent slew of new syscalls have mostly lacked any such trimmings.

-Tony
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Sat May 27 04:25:58 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-05-27 04:26:14 EST