Re: systimer01.patch available for review.

[Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <asmodai@xxxxxx>]

-On [20040128 05:12], Matthew Dillon (dillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>    Well, we don't really support the 386 any more.  The 486 is easy to
>    support because there really isn't that much of a difference in
>    instruction generation, and there are a number of cpus that look more
>    like 486's then pentiums as well as a still fairly robust embedded
>    market based around the 486 core.  So the venerable 486 isn't quite
>    dead yet.

Shouldn't we either decide on:

- Yes we support i386
- No we do no support i386

Otherwise you get this dangling piece of code which can bitrot away.
That's exactly what FreeBSD has been suffering a lot of as well.

If yes, we concentrate on keeping it working, if not we actively work
towards removing support for it and see if we can now optimise by
default for i486 and higher.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7  9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://diary.in-nomine.org/
Don't try to find the Answer where there ain't no Question here...