RE: dropping CONFIG_IA32_SUPPORT from ia64

From: Luck, Tony <>
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.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
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