Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...>, Chris Wright <chrisw@...>
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 02:18:07AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
x86-64 doesn't care about a lot of x86 baggage and a lot of
things have been even obsoleted in the platform.
In practice the backwards compatibility on x86 isn't that
great either. For example a significant number of new systems don't
even work correctly in PIC mode anymore.
Yes, but those for example would be perfectly happy with an arch/i386
with all APIC and SMP code stripped out.
Only the few people who still run dual P5s might not, but
those could continue using old kernels.
But eventually I think that would be the right clean way:
arch/i386 stripped down port for truly old systems like the embedded 386
upto 586 or early 686. No SMP or APIC.
arch/x86 supporting 32bit and 64bit for reasonably modern systems.
NUMAQ/Voyager/P5-SMP/visual workstation gone [frankly the user
base of those is too small to justify the code impact]
It's just quite ugly to get there and when you think through it
the actual advantages of such a setup it is likely not enough to
justify the significant work to make it work.
Also I wouldn't have any idea how to regression test significant
changes to arch/i386 aimed at old systems. e.g. I don't think
the powerpc people actually tried to still support really
old systems where it is hard to do regression tests anymore,
only really supported platforms.
So while such a setup would be quite nice the practical
problems of getting there are nasty. Also I must admit I prefer
hacking on new code instead.
-Andi
-
