On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:18:11 -0800
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
quoted text > Zachary Amsden wrote:
> >
> > I'm speaking specifically in terms of 64-bit platforms here.
> > Shouldn't we unconditionally drop outb_p doing extra port I/O on
> > 64-bit architectures? Especially considering they don't even have
> > an ISA bus where the decode timing could even matter?
> >
>
> Why should the bitsize of the CPU matter for this? It seems one of
> the less meaningful keys for this.
Well, anything that runs x86_64 should be a fairly modern system.
quoted text > Second, as I have mentioned, I don't believe this is really the case,
> especially not for the PIT, which is still present -- the PIT
> *semantics* has explicit timing constraints.
>
> Third, you still have ISA devices, they're just called LPC or PC104
> devices these days.
Or PCMCIA. I'm still a happy user of a Zyxel ZyAIR 100B, it's one of
the most stable cards Wifi I've got running under Linux. :-)
/Christer
--
unsubscribe notice To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Messages in current thread:
Re: [linux-kernel] Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based po ... , Christer Weinigel , (Wed Jan 9, 1:26 pm)