From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: ak@suse.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: discuss@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RFC: let x86_64 no longer define X86
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 01:51:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041119005117.GM4943@stusta.de> (raw)
I'd like to send a patch after 2.6.10 that removes the following from
arch/x86_64/Kconfig:
config X86
bool
default y
Additionally, I'll also check all current X86 uses to prevent breakages.
Why?
X86 is _the_ symbol to identify the i386 architecture, but the x86_64
port hijacked it. Kernel-wise, x86_64 is mostly simply a new port like
e.g. ia64.
Where is the problem?
To say "X86", you currently have to write "(X86 && !X86_64)" in the
Kconfig file. This is not intuitive.
Why is e.g. CONFIG_LBD available on x86_64 and even enabled in
defconfig?
Isn't this an incompatible change?
Yes it is.
But according to the current development model, such changes are allowed
in 2.6 .
And if you want to support both older and more recent kernels, the
following dependencies will be correct both before and after this
change:
- (X86 && !X86_64)
- (X86 && X86_64)
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
next reply other threads:[~2004-11-19 0:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-19 0:51 Adrian Bunk [this message]
2004-11-19 1:14 ` RFC: let x86_64 no longer define X86 Nick Piggin
2004-11-19 1:19 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 1:31 ` [discuss] " Paul Menage
2004-11-19 12:28 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 12:40 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 13:29 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 8:51 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 10:21 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-19 10:34 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 11:28 ` David Woodhouse
2004-11-19 11:55 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 11:50 ` David Woodhouse
2004-11-19 12:05 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 12:12 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-19 12:19 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 12:37 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-19 12:45 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 12:55 ` linux-os
2004-11-19 13:04 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-19 13:35 ` Raul Miller
2004-11-19 14:11 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 13:58 ` David Woodhouse
2004-11-19 12:05 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 12:09 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 11:18 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-11-19 22:31 ` Paul Mackerras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20041119005117.GM4943@stusta.de \
--to=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.