Re: platform/pc64 will be dropped

["Noah yan" <noah.yan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Simon,

how much you building goes? please do not do that at this moment. i am
correcting errors and warning in my kernel building of platform/pc64,
which is based on vkernel sources. i did see a lots of differences in
the pc64 and vkernel (a shrinked pc32) that are mainly from naming
difference, such as register, pmap, frame, etc.

Noah

On 8/23/07, Simon 'corecode' Schubert <corecode@fs.ei.tum.de> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I just had a look into making the kernel compile for amd64.  What I found is the following.
>
> The platform files for pc32 and pc64 are VERY simmilar.  In fact, everything which is not simmilar is cpu-specific bits which need to go into the cpu hierarchy.
>
> Maintaining both seems to be absolutely backwards.  Why have different trees for the same hardware?  The hardware *is* the same.  It is just the CPU, i.e. the instruction set architecture (ISA) which is different.  Everything else, ranging from acpi to smp is the same.  So the obvious and correct solution is to just maintain one.
>
> This, however, leaves us with an awkward name.  Pc32 for x86_64?  The pc32 name always seemed wrong.  How about calling it "ibm-pc"?  After all, that's the basic architecture, since almost 20 years.  Actually, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense it me.
>
> I'll start picking out CPU-specific bits from the pc32 directory and move it to the cpu/i386 directory (and try to update the amd64 directory in the go).
>
> cheers
>   simon
>
> --
> Serve - BSD     +++  RENT this banner advert  +++    ASCII Ribbon   /"\
> Work - Mac      +++  space for low €€€ NOW!1  +++      Campaign     \ /
> Party Enjoy Relax   |   http://dragonflybsd.org      Against  HTML   \
> Dude 2c 2 the max   !   http://golden-apple.biz       Mail + News   / \
>