From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 12:50:32 +0000 Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Linux, Itanium and PA/RISC Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 01:23:32PM +0100, Adriano Galano wrote: > If IPF support PA-RISC mapping is not easy to "port" the PA/RISC Linux, > excluding architectural changes in the chipset or booting process? Why would you want to? ia64 already has its own perfectly good Linux port. > How HP/UX v 11.6 could be offer compatibility between PA/RISC and Itanium 2 > systems? That's `11i v1.6'. Quoting from http://www.hp.com/products1/unix/operating/choice/hp-ux11i_details.html PA-RISC binary compatibility HP-UX 11i version 1.6 includes the Aries dynamic code translation technology as an integrated component. Aries is built on the close relationship between the PA-RISC and Intel Itanium instruction sets and provides binary compatibility for PA-RISC binaries on the Itanium processor family. Aries can be used where performance is not critical or where it is not possible to create a native Itanium processor family binary. > How "exact" is the PA-RISC mapping on the IA-64 core? Not particularly close. If you look at the assembly language level, there's a lot of similarities, but there's a lot of differences too. -- "It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk