From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG_64_BIT
Date: 02 Sep 2003 19:35:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <p73wucrm6uo.fsf@oldwotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030902143424.GO13467@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org> writes:
> What do people think of CONFIG_64_BIT? It saves us from using
> !(IA64 || MIPS64 || PARISC64 || S390X || SPARC64 || X86_64) or
> the X86_64 people deciding their architecture is more important.
>
> I also considered CONFIG_ILP32 vs CONFIG_LP64 (since that's the real
> problem with, eg, megaraid), but that requires more explanation and
> offers people several ways to get it wrong (should I depend on ILP32
> or !LP64?)
At least for code BITS_PER_LONG == 64 is already good enough.
For Kconfigs it may make sense, but is there any Config rule that
checks for all 64bit archs (opposed to checking for specific archs)?
I cannot thinkg of any.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org> writes:
> What do people think of CONFIG_64_BIT? It saves us from using
> !(IA64 || MIPS64 || PARISC64 || S390X || SPARC64 || X86_64) or
> the X86_64 people deciding their architecture is more important.
>
> I also considered CONFIG_ILP32 vs CONFIG_LP64 (since that's the real
> problem with, eg, megaraid), but that requires more explanation and
> offers people several ways to get it wrong (should I depend on ILP32
> or !LP64?)
At least for code BITS_PER_LONG == 64 is already good enough.
For Kconfigs it may make sense, but is there any Config rule that
checks for all 64bit archs (opposed to checking for specific archs)?
I cannot thinkg of any.
-Andi
next parent reply other threads:[~2003-09-02 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20030902143424.GO13467@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2003-09-02 17:35 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2003-09-02 17:44 ` CONFIG_64_BIT Matthew Wilcox
2003-09-02 17:52 ` CONFIG_64_BIT Andi Kleen
2003-09-03 13:37 ` CONFIG_64_BIT Alan Cox
2003-09-02 14:34 CONFIG_64_BIT Matthew Wilcox
2003-09-02 17:52 ` CONFIG_64_BIT Jeff Garzik
2003-09-03 8:39 ` CONFIG_64_BIT Geert Uytterhoeven
2003-09-03 10:10 ` CONFIG_64_BIT Andreas Schwab
2003-09-03 10:44 ` CONFIG_64_BIT Wade
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=p73wucrm6uo.fsf@oldwotan.suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willy@debian.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.