* H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> x86-32 is clumsy though. "Original name that stuck" is perfectly legitimate,
> and having multiple names for the same thing is always worse then having
> slightly imperfect names.
But at least for Kconfigs X86-32 is the name that is much more common:
triton:~/tip>
x86-32 is clumsy though. "Original name that stuck" is perfectly legitimate,
and having multiple names for the same thing is always worse then having
slightly imperfect names.
On June 19, 2015 12:13:05 AM PDT, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>* H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> We have generally used i386 as o
* H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> We have generally used i386 as opposed to x86 for that purpose. [...]
So 'i386' is really the original name that stuck.
'x86-32' sounds more appropriate to me - we should not perpetuate the i386
name,
as we don't run on an original i386 anymore ;-)
Here's what I th
* Brian Gerst wrote:
> > Ok, so your goal is to allow the x32 ABI, but not 32-bit user-space?
>
> It just seems odd that x32 (which is really a 64-bit ABI with 32-bit
> pointers)
> depended on enabling 32-bit support. Other than both using the core compat
> code, they are not really related
We have generally used i386 as opposed to x86 for that purpose. IA32 in MSR
names is part of the MSR name and should not be taken out.
On June 18, 2015 10:49:33 AM PDT, Brian Gerst wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> * H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/08/2015
The issue with that is that "compat" is a cross-architecture feature of the
kernel to handle *some* 32-on-64 bit ABI translations. x32 uses *some* but not
all of the compat machinery.
It is already confusing when you introduce more than two ABIs (e.g. x32 or MIPS
n32) and we need a way to be a
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Brian Gerst wrote:
>
>> >> The original one wasn't really a misnomer, as it referred to the ia32
>> >> system
>> >> calls specifically, but this works too.
>> >
>> > It was a misnomer, because what are the 'ia32 system calls'? We have no
* Brian Gerst wrote:
> >> The original one wasn't really a misnomer, as it referred to the ia32
> >> system
> >> calls specifically, but this works too.
> >
> > It was a misnomer, because what are the 'ia32 system calls'? We have no
> > Intel
> > specific system calls!
> >
> > The term 'IA32
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> On 06/08/2015 03:24 PM, tip-bot for Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> > Commit-ID: bace7117d3fb59a6ed7ea1aa6c8994df6a28a72a
>> > Gitweb:
>> > http://git.kernel.org/tip/bace7117d3fb59a6ed7ea1aa6c8994df6a28a72a
>> > Aut
9 matches
Mail list logo
