On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevche...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Ard Biesheuvel > <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 28 February 2017 at 12:29, Matt Fleming <m...@codeblueprint.co.uk> wrote: >>> On Tue, 28 Feb, at 01:20:25PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> As I said before, I'd be ok with it if we select it compile time, >> i.e., no runtime logic that infers whether we are running on such a >> system or not, and no carrying both implementations in all kernels >> that have capsule loading built in. > > Actually it most likely that Quark kernel (kernel compiled to be run > on Quark) will be ever used on the rest of (modern) x86 since it's > 486+ architecture (kernel has specific option for it, 586TSC).
+ it's UP only! > So, we might just be dependent or chosen by Quark. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
