Re: 2.6.32-rc3: low mem - only 378MB on x86_32 with 64GB. Why?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 - 7:26 am

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, David Woodhouse wrote:


The Intel Xorg guys used to do everything in 32-bit kernels because they 
were also testing that they didn't break compatibility (which is a big 
deal with that whole crazy DRM-in-kernel/direct-rendering-in-user-space 
thing) and seemingly didn't realize that the compat layer was _supposed_ 
to mean that they could run a 64-bit kernel and still have a working 
32-bit land.

It's driver interfaces like that that tend to break. ioctl's etc. But I 
have heard less noise about it lately, so I do think it's mostly working.

		Linus
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: 2.6.32-rc3: low mem - only 378MB on x86_32 with 64GB. Why?, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Oct 6, 7:26 am)
Re: 2.6.32-rc3: low mem - only 378MB on x86_32 with 64GB. Why?, Valdis.Kletnieks, (Sat Oct 10, 11:10 am)
Re: 2.6.32-rc3: low mem - only 378MB on x86_32 with 64GB. Why?, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Sun Oct 11, 2:06 am)
Re: 2.6.32-rc3: low mem - only 378MB on x86_32 with 64GB. Why?, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Sun Oct 11, 2:08 am)