Hi Thomas et al.
After spending several hours fiddeling with and improving
the current Makefile for x86_64 I decided to take a closer look
at the x86 merge og i386 and x86_64.
I took a closer look at x86/pci. There are 16 C files.
From the mails and discussions I expected it be be
obvious what was i386 only, what was shared and what was x86_64 only.
But see following table
Filename i386 x86_64
acpi.c X X
common.c X X
direct.c X X
early.c X X
fixup.c X X
i386.c X X
init.c X X
irq.c X
k8-bus.c X
legacy.c X X
mmconfig_32.c X
mmconfig_64.c X
mmconfig-shared.c X X
numa.c X
pcbios.c X
visws.c X
In the filename there is NOTHING for most of
the non-shared code that tell that this file is
used by only i386 or x86_64.
The exception is mmconfig that is prefixed with _32 versus _64.
But as I have understood the mails floating around using _32,_64
is a way to say here are a potential candidate for futher merging.
In a meged x86 tree it would be very beneficial to either include
in the filename that a specific file is i386 or x86_64 specific or
stuff them in a separate subdirectory.
If legacy.c numa.c, pcibios.c and visws.c placed in a directory named i386
then it would be obvious that this is i386 only.
Or they could be named filename_32 (or the uglier filename_i386).
As it stands out today the filename are kept but thier relationship are lost.
I dunno if this will address the concern of Andi about mixing i386 and x86_64
but to me at least things would be so much more obvious if the original
relationship are spelled out.
Sam
-
