Re: [RFC, Announce] Unified x86 architecture, arch/x86

Matt Mackall
2007-07-21T22:26:42Z

On Sat, Jul 21, 2007 at 12:32:59AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> How is the new arch/x86 and include/asm-x86 namespace layed out? Our
> foremost concern was to enable a 100% smooth transition to the new,
> shared architecture, while still enabling much more fine-grained future
> unification of the source code. To do this we consciously aimed for the
> strictest possible unification strategy: we only 'unified' those source
> files that are already bit for bit equal between the two architectures
> today. For all other files we used the following rule: if a file came
> from arch/i386/foo/bar.c, it gets moved to arch/x86/foo/bar_32.c, if it
> came from arch/x86_64/foo/bar.c it gets moved to arch/x86/foo/bar_64.c.
> We also generated arch/x86/foo/bar.c that simply #include's those two
> files (depending on whether we do a 32-bit or a 64-bit built). If a file
> only existed in only one of the architectures, it's moved to
> arch/x86/foo/bar.c straight away. (take a look at our git repository to
> see how this works out in practice.)

Can we see some stats on:

How many files were auto-merged?
How many files got 32.c and 64.c extensions?
How many existed only in one arch?

--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.